[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Chad Ford on Lee's future
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
2/4/2009  4:10 PM
Posted by MS:

What flaws are those, he is ever improving, he will become a better shoter. He couldn't hit a free throw or an outside shot. Now he is money from the line and his outside game is really improving. He has someone that is good at getting him the ball, once we add more talent he will flourish even more.

They are talking about tyson chandler getting 11-12 on the open market. The guy has no offensive game, and isn't a great rebounder. He plays good, not great defense, so lee will have a market. Worst case you trade big for small.

Eddy if he gets into the shape he was in when he was putting up 19 can still be effective for 15-20 minutes a night. Just need him to play this season...

you have to think long term when re-signing someone to a 6 year deal. at some point, will having lee on the roster as opposed to another max player hurt the team in 2011 or 2012? it's a tough question to answer. you would essentially be trading lee away without any guarantee of replacing him with a better player.

but i ask, what's better for the knicks: lebron + lee + jeffries or lebron + bosh?

imho, if you're going all in for 2010, you go all in for 2010...which means dumping whatever you can even if it costs you lee.
AUTOADVERT
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
2/4/2009  4:15 PM
Posted by SkyWalker:

why can't the knicks just sign Lee and Nate and worry about trading Curry and Jeffries next year??? Sometimes I feel like ppl think Curry must be moved this year. Let the guy get his act together, get in shape and then ship him out next year.

The thing with guys like Eddy is they may never play again he might pull a Jerome James. As for Jefferies his game absolutely blows and packaging him on with Lee or Nate would do wonders for the KNicks in the cap space dept.

Got to make sacrifices now to get it together for the future. Besides I really honestly think that LeBron and Wade are pipe dreams the guys I would target are Amare, Joe Johnson someone along those lines.
s3231
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #544
USA
2/4/2009  5:13 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:

Unless Im getting Chris Bosh back--Im not trading David Lee

I think BRIGGS said it the best here. There is no reason to trade Lee right now when we still have another full season of attempts to unload Jeffries and Curry. It just doesn't make sense to trade your best player because you are scared of not having enough cap for the 2010 FA class.

The way Nate has been playing, you'd have to think that we can at least use him to unload Jeffries' salary.

But unless we are getting an excellent return on Lee, we should not even consider trading him at this point.
"This is a very cautious situation that we're in. You have to be conservative in terms of using your assets and using them wisely. We're building for the future." - Zeke (I guess not protecting a first round pick is being conservative)
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
2/4/2009  6:05 PM
Posted by Vmart:

That is why I say we should look to trade Lee, becuase we all know at this moment that Curry and Jefferies can't be moved. I'm think Lee, Curry and Jefferies for Marion and a pick or Cook could work.

So we dump the good players, because we can't get rid of bad players, hoping to hit the 2010 home run in the process.

I'd prefer to keep David Lee even if it means we can "only" sign 1 big time FA in 2010 - and then wait for Curry/Jeffries to expire in 2011 and use that space to sign another big time FA in 2011. Then we can have all three.

What if we don't hit the home run in 2010? Then we got rid of Lee for no real reason.

Besides I think it's quite obvious that the way the roster shaping is going that the first season we can have high expectations for this club, like solid 2nd round playoff contenders/ecf hopefuls, is the 2011/2012 season. Therefore you target 2011 to "finish the roster" so to speak.

All this considered, again, Lee playing out of his mind, I say pay him if we can get him reasonably, and unfortunately 10M a year IS reasonable for his production, hope to target ONE FA in 2010, and then let the cap take care of itself in 2011 and use that space that summer to round out the roster.

http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27725
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
2/4/2009  6:10 PM
Posted by SkyWalker:

why can't the knicks just sign Lee and Nate and worry about trading Curry and Jeffries next year??? Sometimes I feel like ppl think Curry must be moved this year. Let the guy get his act together, get in shape and then ship him out next year.

You really think he is going to get his act together? This is not an act... this is him. In the right system, he can be an offensive beast. But, this isn't that kind of system. His value can't get any lower now, but its not going to get much higher either. Cut your losses.
You know I gonna spin wit it
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
2/4/2009  6:15 PM
Posted by EwingsGlass:
Posted by SkyWalker:

why can't the knicks just sign Lee and Nate and worry about trading Curry and Jeffries next year??? Sometimes I feel like ppl think Curry must be moved this year. Let the guy get his act together, get in shape and then ship him out next year.

You really think he is going to get his act together? This is not an act... this is him. In the right system, he can be an offensive beast. But, this isn't that kind of system. His value can't get any lower now, but its not going to get much higher either. Cut your losses.

Cut losses meaning you think we can use Lee to trade Curry? Impossible. No team is going to commit 20M+ to David Lee through 2011. That's exactly what they will be doing by taking Curry (10M+) and having to extend Lee at 10M+. No team is doing that.

Jeffries? At 6M per year the last thing you do is panic and waste David Lee to get rid of him. Maybe Nate Robinson though...maybe a team would do that but I think Jeffries has a trade kicker that bumps him to near 8M per year in trade. Oops, thanks Isiah, you just keep on giving!

Honestly, to reiterate, I'd rather keep Lee, Duhon, and maybe even Nate - we'd still manage a good 2010 signing - and then let 2011 Curry/Jeffries expire on their own and use that space to make another very solid 2011 signing. Then have a good run at things in the 2011/2012 season - which would likely be the first season we'd be really solid to begin with. It's not like we're a lock to sign LeBron+other max FA in 2010 and run to the NBA Finals the way the Celtics did it last year. Very unlikely to ever occur so why waste Lee over that?

No use panicking and using our assets to dump Curry/Jeffries since 2010 is NOT a double-max-FA-signing given - only to strike out in 2010, have cap space in 2011, and realize "wow we just dumped Lee and Nate for absolutely nothing! NOTHING! Foolish!"


http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27725
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
2/4/2009  6:19 PM
Posted by Cosmic:
Posted by Vmart:

That is why I say we should look to trade Lee, becuase we all know at this moment that Curry and Jefferies can't be moved. I'm think Lee, Curry and Jefferies for Marion and a pick or Cook could work.

So we dump the good players, because we can't get rid of bad players, hoping to hit the 2010 home run in the process.

I'd prefer to keep David Lee even if it means we can "only" sign 1 big time FA in 2010 - and then wait for Curry/Jeffries to expire in 2011 and use that space to sign another big time FA in 2011. Then we can have all three.

Just because you have 17M coming off the cap will not mean you have 17m in cap space. Under your scenario, in the summer of 2011 Chandler will be a RFA, Max Player number 1 will have a 10.5% pay increase (2.7M), Lee and Nate would have pay increases, you have a pay new #1 draft pick (roughly 2M), and any other player on the roster (i.e. Gallo, our 2009 draft pick, etc...) will have pay increases.

Its best to put all your eggs in one basket if you are going to play the FA game... there will not be much left over for 2011.

But if you are at or over the cap in 2011, you can resign Chandler using Bird Rights, you can sign another player using the MLE, a third to the LLE, and increases in player salaries just put you further over the cap... we really only get one shot at this, we should do it right.
You know I gonna spin wit it
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
2/4/2009  6:27 PM
Posted by EwingsGlass:


Just because you have 17M coming off the cap will not mean you have 17m in cap space. Under your scenario, in the summer of 2011 Chandler will be a RFA, Max Player number 1 will have a 10.5% pay increase (2.7M), Lee and Nate would have pay increases, you have a pay new #1 draft pick (roughly 2M), and any other player on the roster (i.e. Gallo, our 2009 draft pick, etc...) will have pay increases.

Its best to put all your eggs in one basket if you are going to play the FA game... there will not be much left over for 2011.

But if you are at or over the cap in 2011, you can resign Chandler using Bird Rights, you can sign another player using the MLE, a third to the LLE, and increases in player salaries just put you further over the cap... we really only get one shot at this, we should do it right.

I think it's dangerous to play the home run game with a team's future. It's one thing to do it with one draft pick but not with a free agency period unless you're so very certain you can't lose.
Just because you have 17M coming off the cap will not mean you have 17m in cap space.

I know this but if we do things properly we will have plenty of cap space in both 2010 and 2011 to shape the team. It's not a given that Lee or Chandler would be here come that summer anyway.

There is no need to panic. I think it's impossible to trade Curry to any team unless we went insane and offered our 09 pick, lee, gallo, chandler, etc... and even then some teams will say "I just can't take all that salary to have 10M of it sit at home doing nothing through 2011 which will prevent us from adding to the players you gave us!"

I think the second point I am trying to make is we have plenty of options. I think some get too intrigued by 2010 and believe we only have one shot at things and we have to do everything possible to try to score in 2010 - or else everything is a failure and there's no hope or options beyond that summer. I think that's untrue. Lee is a special player. If we can retain him for 10M per year average we do it and worry about things down the line.

The point is to have a good player on the roster that others like to play with. David Lee is one of those players. Why sacrifice that for a slim chance at having two max FAs in 2010? I just don't agree with that line of thinking given how well Lee is playing and how well he fits the system and how well other players play with him - he can play with ANYONE and that's very valuable. He's also still improving. The fear involved with looking to retain a very good player is reaching a baffling level IMO.

It better be one sweet ass deal we get if we ship Lee out. A whole lot more than just cap space coming back.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
2/4/2009  6:31 PM
Posted by Cosmic:

I think it's dangerous to play the home run game with a team's future. It's one thing to do it with one draft pick but not with a free agency period unless you're so very certain you can't lose.

And before someone tries to jump on this comment I will clarify beforehand.

We needed to clear 2010 space to give us a shot at the 2010 FA market. What I am saying here is you don't continue to get rid of EVERYONE ELSE to try to score multiple 2010 home runs because if you fail then you've just lost several GOOD PLAYERS along the way and have nothing to show for it.

The Orlando Magic did this. They cleared for the 2000 FA market. They could not get Duncan but did get TMac/Hill (didnt work but thats not the point). From here what they did was spent three more years purging the roster of all their other good players, solid role players both starters and rotation bench guys, thinking they would land Duncan in 2003. They didn't and in the end they sacrificed a LOT of talent in the process and came away with nothing.

Different scenario but same idea. I'm not ready to throw Lee, Nate, Duhon to the wind just to think *hey if I do we can get TWO max FAs!!!*. We already lined ourselves up for one. It's doubtful we can move the players who are REALLY in the way of allowing two (Curry/Jeffries) so I am uncomfortable with moving players who are actually good - to essentially make room for two crap player's contracts - hoping to still hit two home runs in 2010.

Not a good idea.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
2/4/2009  7:04 PM
i honestly think the best bet on lee is to play chicken with other teams this summer.

i don't know if anyone has noticed, but the economy STINKS. and it's going to continue to stink for a long time. that's going to make some teams gunshy. maybe not Paul Allen's Blazers, but a lot of other teams. and do the Blazers really want to give Lee 6yrs $60M to be their 6th man? and even if the Blazers come at us with that, we can try to match or try to work a sign and trade at that point. etc. no reason to do anything until the summer.

[Edited by - crzymdups on 04-02-2009 7:05 PM]
¿ △ ?
King1
Posts: 22993
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/2/2005
Member: #998
USA
2/4/2009  7:28 PM
The way Lee is playing he isnt a sixth man. He is going to average 16-12 this year and about 18-13 since he started. You can talk about his flaws and all 10 million dollar players have flaws if they didnt they would be called superstars
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
2/4/2009  8:01 PM
you'd start him over lamarcus and oden? well, of course you would. but would portland.
¿ △ ?
King1
Posts: 22993
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/2/2005
Member: #998
USA
2/4/2009  8:10 PM
I dont think Lee is going anywhere I think he is staying here. I think given the minutes he can do the same thing Alderidge can do not Oden
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
2/4/2009  8:33 PM
i think he's staying and i'm happy about it. i'd love to keep nate, lee, duhon, gallo, wilson and add a couple solid draft picks and one superstar and maybe nash and make a go of it.

[Edited by - crzymdups on 04-02-2009 8:33 PM]
¿ △ ?
Papabear
Posts: 24382
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 3/31/2007
Member: #1414
2/4/2009  10:23 PM
Papabear Says

Look! If the knicks really want to clear cap space just buy Curry out next season because if we get 2 bigs in 2010 the Dolans will make that money back 2 fold.
Papabear
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
2/4/2009  10:44 PM
Posted by Cosmic:
Posted by EwingsGlass:
Posted by SkyWalker:

why can't the knicks just sign Lee and Nate and worry about trading Curry and Jeffries next year??? Sometimes I feel like ppl think Curry must be moved this year. Let the guy get his act together, get in shape and then ship him out next year.

You really think he is going to get his act together? This is not an act... this is him. In the right system, he can be an offensive beast. But, this isn't that kind of system. His value can't get any lower now, but its not going to get much higher either. Cut your losses.

Cut losses meaning you think we can use Lee to trade Curry? Impossible. No team is going to commit 20M+ to David Lee through 2011. That's exactly what they will be doing by taking Curry (10M+) and having to extend Lee at 10M+. No team is doing that.

Jeffries? At 6M per year the last thing you do is panic and waste David Lee to get rid of him. Maybe Nate Robinson though...maybe a team would do that but I think Jeffries has a trade kicker that bumps him to near 8M per year in trade. Oops, thanks Isiah, you just keep on giving!

Honestly, to reiterate, I'd rather keep Lee, Duhon, and maybe even Nate - we'd still manage a good 2010 signing - and then let 2011 Curry/Jeffries expire on their own and use that space to make another very solid 2011 signing. Then have a good run at things in the 2011/2012 season - which would likely be the first season we'd be really solid to begin with. It's not like we're a lock to sign LeBron+other max FA in 2010 and run to the NBA Finals the way the Celtics did it last year. Very unlikely to ever occur so why waste Lee over that?

No use panicking and using our assets to dump Curry/Jeffries since 2010 is NOT a double-max-FA-signing given - only to strike out in 2010, have cap space in 2011, and realize "wow we just dumped Lee and Nate for absolutely nothing! NOTHING! Foolish!"

You are getting back picks and expiring contracts. you can't rely on 2011 cap space might be limited to MLE by the time 2011 arrives. You will have to pay for players currently on the roster also and some will be in contract year. You have to do this in one shot in 2010 get two max players and the core will be Chandler, Gallo and draft picks made through the last two years.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
2/5/2009  6:40 AM
Posted by Papabear:

Papabear Says

Look! If the knicks really want to clear cap space just buy Curry out next season because if we get 2 bigs in 2010 the Dolans will make that money back 2 fold.

Bonn says
You need to learn how the salary cap works
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
2/5/2009  9:10 AM
Posted by Papabear:

Papabear Says

Look! If the knicks really want to clear cap space just buy Curry out next season because if we get 2 bigs in 2010 the Dolans will make that money back 2 fold.
That is an option. Curry's last year is a player option. If you buy him out for all of his 09 salary you wont have anything on the books for him the year your trying to get under the cap. With his financial troubles you could offer it in some kind of lump sum which might make him bite. Its a lot of money and your paying him $10mm next year to play for someone else but we have bigger plans.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Chad Ford on Lee's future
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy