What about Stephon Marbury + Zach Randolph for Ben Wallace + Wally Sczerbiak + 19th?

Posted by SupremeCommander:

Posted by TMS:

i like Ellis but Nate/Lee, Malik & the #6 for Ellis & the #14 is too much to give up.

I wasn't sure about posting that idea because I thought the Knicks were giving up too little... If that's too much then, maybe something more beneficial for the Knicks could be worked out. I don't know, I think Ellis is a young, special player that would thrive with Mike D'Anotni so I' be willing to pay a higher price to get him. I'd actually have a lot of fun watching him, Crawford, Chandler, and either Lee or Nate run up and down the court. Brandon Wright/#14 (let's say Joe Alexander) would likely contribute too. I wouldn't be on it, but Randolph might actually work on a team like that because he'd be expected to look for his offense quickly. Jeffries might actually be serviceable at center, a la Boris Diaw.

IMO if u can draft a kid like Bayless w/the #6 mine as well hold onto Lee & Malik's expiring... doesn't he have a lot of the same skillset at Ellis?

Posted by TMS:

IMO if u can draft a kid like Bayless w/the #6 mine as well hold onto Lee & Malik's expiring... doesn't he have a lot of the same skillset at Ellis?

I think Bayless and Ellis have similar skill sets, yes, but I don't think its very probable that Bayless will be as good as Ellis. Last season he averaged 20 PPG on 53%, 5 RPG, and 4 APG. Even better, his efficiency rating was 20.5 in his second year. He's fast as hell and I think D'Antoni would get the very best from him, especially with how the new rules favor fast guards. I'd bet the farm on him being a great fit for the Knicks and is the type of risk worth taking, unlike Curry/Randolph/Crawford etc.

As for the CLE trade, I don't think that's possible either. I think if you package Marbury and Randolph though it has a higher chance of happening due to increased production... my logic is if they were going to do Randolph for Big Ben, why not roll the dice for a year with a much larger increase in production? Just a thought

Posted by TMS:

i like Ellis but Nate/Lee, Malik & the #6 for Ellis & the #14 is too much to give up.

Some of you make it sound like David Lee is almost untouchable. This 1st yr under D'Anonio will allow all of the knicks remaining players to show what they are really made of since Isiah the enabler is gone.

Baron Davis has matured and his approach to the game the way he prepares has improved.

Posted by playa2:

Posted by TMS:

i like Ellis but Nate/Lee, Malik & the #6 for Ellis & the #14 is too much to give up.

Some of you make it sound like David Lee is almost untouchable. This 1st yr under D'Anonio will allow all of the knicks remaining players to show what they are really made of since Isiah the enabler is gone.

Baron Davis has matured and his approach to the game the way he prepares has improved.

i have never once made D Lee out to be some kind of untouchable... i've proposed more than a few trade ideas involving Lee that i thought were fair (Lee, Malik's expiring & the #6 for Yi & Bogut being one)... that's the type of trade that addresses our needs for team balance & is more of a fair exchange of talent overall IMO.

it's not like i'm saying the Knicks would be getting fleeced here, just that i would rather make other uses of our assets, either to draft the best player we can, help to address the cap, or to achieve better team balance... getting a player like Ellis would be nice but if we can simply draft one w/the #6 why even bother? & i don't see how Ellis addresses the last 2 points either, especially when we'll have to sign him to a pretty huge contract to even make that deal possible.

the hell with Baron Davis... he's the most overrated G in the NBA & on these forums if u ask me... 1 healthy season in 6 & people start jocking him like there's no tomorrow... before the Warriors made it past the 1st round last year, he was a bum to just about everyone here... i think he's a talented player but pretty much in the same class as the Marburys, Randolphs, Francis's, Vince Carters, T-Macs, etc. when they were being hyped up on these forums, & i don't see this team going anywhere w/Baron leading them but a 1st or 2nd round elimination in the playoffs at best... for that i don't forfeit any chance of targetting someone like Lebron, Paul, Kobe, Wade or anyone else in that class who we could actually build around by signing & trading for someone like Baron Davis.

Golden St will never trade Monta Ellis, who started that one ?

The kid is a star on the rise and he's still on his rookie contract as a 2nd rd pick.

By Marcus Thompson
Saturday, May 10th, 2008 at 7:23 pm in Uncategorized.

According to a source with knowledge of extension negotiations between Baron Davis and Warriors management, the Warriors are playing hardball with their star point guard. President Rowell and VP Mullin came at Baron with an “insulting” offer - so much so that B. Diddy is questioning whether the Warriors view him as their franchise player.
Tough negotiating is hardly a bad ploy, especially considering the Warriors’ history of fiscal irresponsibility. But there is a time and place for it, and this may not be the time. It was last offseason, when Don Nelson and Mickael Pietreus were looking for too much icing on their cake. But now might be a bad time for Warriors management to throw around its weight.
Why? Because Baron, the team’s best player, had already issued the first peace offering. Instead of threatening to opt out, instead of seeing which desiring team he could use to sweeten his deal, Baron bowed down. He said he wanted to stay a Warrior and he wasn’t going to demand a ridiculous amount of money. He conceded his leverage. Even if he recognized he had very little, it was a relatively commendable gesture because he made himself vulnerable by voluntarily setting aside his options.
The proper response to that is not to stick it to him, or make him think you are sticking it to him. Sure, get the best deal for the team, but don’t make him regret throwing himself at the mercy of the execs.
Why not, you say?
• The Warriors need Baron. Losing him means starting over, it means getting back in the skimpy market for a proven frontline NBA star, a franchise player. Even if you are of the belief that Monta is Baron’s replacement (which I am not, especially not yet), then the Warriors will be needing a No. 2 or No. 3 star, which is also hard to coup. Plus, he’s the reason guys like Al and Jax, and anyother player with the Warriors
on their short list is Baron.
• The Warriors will be sending a bad message to players, future and current. In less than a year, three players have voiced their disapproval with how they were treated by management (Jason Richardson, Mickael Pietrus and Matt Barnes). That’s not a good way to land a top motivated talent, which the Warriors will need to do. Players won’t want to come if the Warriors are not shelling out big money and have a rep - justified or not - for lowballing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second-year center Patrick O'Bryant made it clear during the season that he has no interest in returning to a Nelson-led team, and veteran forwards Matt Barnes and Mickael Pietrus might be pushed out in order to get the younger players more court time.

"I don't know what it means (for Barnes and Pietrus)," Nelson said. "You can't take minutes away from certain players in the press. That's going to happen on the floor. But (Wright and Belinelli) have to play and are going to get out there."

It's time to grab Baron and Azubuike from the warriors for Steph, Nate to balance the trade.


NY GETS:
Baron Davis
6-3 PG from UCLA
21.8 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 7.6 apg in 39.0 minutes
Kelenna Azubuike
6-5 SG from Kentucky
8.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 0.9 apg in 21.4 minutes

FOR
Stephon Marbury
6-2 PG from Georgia Tech
13.9 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.7 apg in 33.5 minutes
Nate Robinson
5-9 PG from Washington
12.7 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.9 apg in 26.2 minutes

This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.