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

How about this trade with Washington
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/6/2009  10:59 AM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by TMS:

ur such a damn hypocrite... u rag on me for suggesting we trade Nate at the deadline for a mid 1st round pick & then u suggest something like this where we not only give up Nate, but also our lottery pick this year, for freakin' Javale McGee... gimme a break dude... have u no shame?

I think Mcgee is much better than anyone we can possibly get at 9. To get am athletic 7 footer who had some very nice moments in the NBA his first season and get rid of Jefferies 7mm is very attractive. I don't want to trade Nate for a 14 pick like you. How does this trade suggest that in anyway? This draft is not very good. This is trading OUT.

i have a feeling u might change ur tune if ur golden boy BJ Mullens was available at #12-14.

& even if he wasn't, with a #8-9 & a #12-14 pick u can probably trade up & move into the top 5... then u'd have ur choice from guys like Thabeet, Hill, Mullens & Patterson... or u can just keep the pick & draft 2 lottery prospects... or u can combine those picks w/Lee & Jefferies in a blockbuster type move for a legitimate superstar... that's the type of deal i'd be willing to throw in our lottery picks for... not for some unproven prospect like Javale McGee, i don't care how much upside u think he's got.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
AUTOADVERT
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
3/6/2009  11:06 AM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by TMS:

ur such a damn hypocrite... u rag on me for suggesting we trade Nate at the deadline for a mid 1st round pick & then u suggest something like this where we not only give up Nate, but also our lottery pick this year, for freakin' Javale McGee... gimme a break dude... have u no shame?

I think Mcgee is much better than anyone we can possibly get at 9. To get am athletic 7 footer who had some very nice moments in the NBA his first season and get rid of Jefferies 7mm is very attractive. I don't want to trade Nate for a 14 pick like you. How does this trade suggest that in anyway? This draft is not very good. This is trading OUT.

i have a feeling u might change ur tune if ur golden boy BJ Mullens was available at #12-14.

& even if he wasn't, with a #8-9 & a #12-14 pick u can probably trade up & move into the top 5... then u'd have ur choice from guys like Thabeet, Hill, Mullens & Patterson... or u can just keep the pick & draft 2 lottery prospects... or u can combine those picks w/Lee & Jefferies in a blockbuster type move for a legitimate superstar... that's the type of deal i'd be willing to throw in our lottery picks for... not for some unproven prospect like Javale McGee, i don't care how much upside u think he's got.

Ive seen Javale have double doubles in the NBA--Ive seen no one from this draft. Mcgee and Randolph are much closer to full time rotation players than ANY big man drafted from college after 3. For someone to say Greg Monroe is better than either of these guys is absurd. Mullens didnt even play 30 minutes all year long. Mcgee and Randolph are going to be light years ahead of anyone except the top 3 picks in terms of big man. They have a full year of nBA basketball and they have both proven they can play.
RIP Crushalot😞
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
3/6/2009  11:10 AM
How this deal help the Wizards. I mean they are going to give up on a promising Center prospect for what? they already have most bases covered on the team why would they add Nate, Jefferies and a possible 9th pick? It makes no sense from their prospective to give up a promising center and expiring contracts.
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
3/6/2009  11:21 AM
McGee is definitely a project, even though he's been in the league for a year. Dude is as raw as I've seen for a player who gets any kind of minutes.

Oh wait... Marvin Williams... so McGee is the 2nd most raw player I've seen get major minutes.

You know he can run, rebound and block though, so I'd be happy with him on our team.

The only question I would have about Thabeet is if he can hold up for 82 games. He'd change the game for us big time though.

Mullens is a total question mark. He doesn't start or get any minutes at OSU. You have to infer a lot about his game. Dangerous pick for a team like the Knicks.

Hill is probably going to be long gone. Kid is another athlete, has a good motor and can shoot ok.

Jordan could be had later in the 1st, so there's less risk there. If we took him in the 20's it would mean that we bought another pick. You can take more of a risk there.

I don't see Monroe. I've seen him play at least ten games. I see him as a first round pick for sure, but he's being projected #2 overall. He's good, but not that good.

I don't trade our pick to get McGee or Randolph. I would try to use Lee or Nate to get them though.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/6/2009  11:22 AM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by TMS:

ur such a damn hypocrite... u rag on me for suggesting we trade Nate at the deadline for a mid 1st round pick & then u suggest something like this where we not only give up Nate, but also our lottery pick this year, for freakin' Javale McGee... gimme a break dude... have u no shame?

I think Mcgee is much better than anyone we can possibly get at 9. To get am athletic 7 footer who had some very nice moments in the NBA his first season and get rid of Jefferies 7mm is very attractive. I don't want to trade Nate for a 14 pick like you. How does this trade suggest that in anyway? This draft is not very good. This is trading OUT.

i have a feeling u might change ur tune if ur golden boy BJ Mullens was available at #12-14.

& even if he wasn't, with a #8-9 & a #12-14 pick u can probably trade up & move into the top 5... then u'd have ur choice from guys like Thabeet, Hill, Mullens & Patterson... or u can just keep the pick & draft 2 lottery prospects... or u can combine those picks w/Lee & Jefferies in a blockbuster type move for a legitimate superstar... that's the type of deal i'd be willing to throw in our lottery picks for... not for some unproven prospect like Javale McGee, i don't care how much upside u think he's got.

Ive seen Javale have double doubles in the NBA--Ive seen no one from this draft. Mcgee and Randolph are much closer to full time rotation players than ANY big man drafted from college after 3. For someone to say Greg Monroe is better than either of these guys is absurd. Mullens didnt even play 30 minutes all year long. Mcgee and Randolph are going to be light years ahead of anyone except the top 3 picks in terms of big man. They have a full year of nBA basketball and they have both proven they can play.

ok, so now your no brainer #1 overall pick in next year's draft Mullens is not worthy of trading up for now if we have the opportunity to do so? ur positions fluctuate so much it's hard to keep up where u stand on anything... if u wanna start talking about "proven" talent, Nate is more proven in this league than either McGee or Randolph... if u wanna start talking about potential then again i wonder why Mullens who u've been talking so highly about the past few weeks is now not even close to being as good a prospect as McGee or Randolph in your eyes... if those 2 kids were such great prospects then why do u envision teams being willing to trade them away? Lee or Nate + lottery pick should net u a lot more than just Javale McGee or Anthony Randolph & 6 mil in cap space, i'm sorry.

[Edited by - TMS on 03-06-2009 08:23 AM]
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27724
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
3/6/2009  11:33 AM
Posted by JohnWallace44:

EGlass, no dude. How does Monroe fit this team?

Hard to say he's a more proven quantity than a player like Randolph who already has a high efficiency rating in the league.

Gallo, to his credit, has to go all out to make it up and down the floor with the rest of the team. If we draft a center, it has to be one that can run. Hill, Jordan, Thabeet, it's not as if there are none out there.


I guess I am relying on his filled out size. I see a guys like McGee who need to put on mass to be able to hold their own on the block and I wonder if they will truly do that. Monroe may be a bit soft, but he has a bigger frame... my point isn't really to put the merits of Monroe individually over a McGee or Rnadolph, but I do beleive that the benefits of both those players are their upside not their current ability. Maybe you go for a 4th year player with size... I just think perhaps this draft should be less about upside and more about finding a player that will make an immediate impact on an 8 or 9 man rotation.
You know I gonna spin wit it
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
3/6/2009  11:44 AM
Posted by EwingsGlass:
Posted by JohnWallace44:

EGlass, no dude. How does Monroe fit this team?

Hard to say he's a more proven quantity than a player like Randolph who already has a high efficiency rating in the league.

Gallo, to his credit, has to go all out to make it up and down the floor with the rest of the team. If we draft a center, it has to be one that can run. Hill, Jordan, Thabeet, it's not as if there are none out there.


I guess I am relying on his filled out size. I see a guys like McGee who need to put on mass to be able to hold their own on the block and I wonder if they will truly do that. Monroe may be a bit soft, but he has a bigger frame... my point isn't really to put the merits of Monroe individually over a McGee or Rnadolph, but I do beleive that the benefits of both those players are their upside not their current ability. Maybe you go for a 4th year player with size... I just think perhaps this draft should be less about upside and more about finding a player that will make an immediate impact on an 8 or 9 man rotation.


Have you watched either of these guys play? I mean Randolph had 20 points 8 rebounds 4 blocks in 24 minutes the other night? Monroe doesnt have half the motor Randolph has and he doesnt have Mcgee's size and athletic ability. I mean Monroe averaged 6 rebounds at GTown and their team was 15-12.

Just to further illustrate just how fast and athletic Mcgee is up the court I enter exhibits A-B--C

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMm1_j9uW1o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgNrmQjgsug

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOL6EFe32Xo&NR=1

In the words of Marc Jackson--are you kidding me? Greg Monroe isnt going to wear either of their jock straps.

[Edited by - BRIGGS on 03-06-2009 11:50 AM]
RIP Crushalot😞
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
3/6/2009  6:49 PM
I've been more impressed with his blocks



It would be great if you could make a trade for him, but I don't know how you do that at this point without relieving some of their salary.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
How about this trade with Washington
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