hell even in baseball where there's no salary cap, sometimes u gotta make sacrifices & let players u love go for the good of the future of the franchise... it's obviously not easy putting teams together if it were GM's would have a much longer shelf life in professional sports... not every move that's made is gonna work out & not every move is gonna go over well w/the fanbase, but GM's don't get paid to make fans happy, they get paid to try & maximize the money the spend in putting together the best winning formula.

Rookie wrote:so is Lee an 8M dollar guy or a 12M dollar guy? 5 years 60M is steep even if he is having a good year. We could of just kept Zach Randolph

In terms of putting a player on the floor who is going to help you win, Lee is much better than Randolph, it's not even a comparison. 29 out of 30 GMs in the league would prefer Lee at a reasoable contract (8-9M) or Randolph at the same price.

Knixkik wrote:

Rookie wrote:so is Lee an 8M dollar guy or a 12M dollar guy? 5 years 60M is steep even if he is having a good year. We could of just kept Zach Randolph

In terms of putting a player on the floor who is going to help you win, Lee is much better than Randolph, it's not even a comparison. 29 out of 30 GMs in the league would prefer Lee at a reasoable contract (8-9M) or Randolph at the same price.

i agree, i would rather have Lee over Zach anyday, but i seriously doubt he'll sign for anything less than $10-11M per... at that point u have to decide if he's worth sacrificing in other areas of need to hold onto... this is where the argument lies in essence... everyone seems to have varying degrees of what they're willing to give up in order to make a certain goal reachable... personally for me i'd give up every player on this team including Gallo right now if it meant we'd have at least a realistic chance at winning a championship in the next 5 years.

Rookie wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

Rookie wrote:so is Lee an 8M dollar guy or a 12M dollar guy? 5 years 60M is steep even if he is having a good year. We could of just kept Zach Randolph

In terms of putting a player on the floor who is going to help you win, Lee is much better than Randolph, it's not even a comparison. 29 out of 30 GMs in the league would prefer Lee at a reasoable contract (8-9M) or Randolph at the same price.

And you can name all the winning teams Lee and Randolph have played on? My point is, Lee isn't signing for that, trade him now and get something for him...or get nothing later except maybe another contract like Randolph's

Randolph has had many chances and he's not a winning player. If you're perception of a winning player means they have to play for a winning team, then you're right, Lee hasn't proven to be a winning player. But let's not forget these are the Knicks, who's poor management decisions would clearly override any winning talent they actually brought in along the way. Winning teams want Lee at a reasonable price because they recognize what he brings to the table. And not as a 6th man, he would start on most teams in the league. He's not one of those players you judge based on his record thus far in the league, because you and i know that's not a fair assessment whatsoever. Bottom line is, the guy cares and plays the right way, and has a lot of talent on top of it.

TMS wrote:fish, i'm trying to focus on the team, not on any individual player... this has nothing to do w/any personal fetish or dislike for any particular guy, it's a general approach to building the best possible team that can most realistically bring us championships in the near future.

hell even in baseball where there's no salary cap, sometimes u gotta make sacrifices & let players u love go for the good of the future of the franchise... it's obviously not easy putting teams together if it were GM's would have a much longer shelf life in professional sports... not every move that's made is gonna work out & not every move is gonna go over well w/the fanbase, but GM's don't get paid to make fans happy, they get paid to try & maximize the money the spend in putting together the best winning formula.

Rookie wrote:Just based on a small sampling of Lee's contract negotiations over the summer...he's not going to sign for 8-9M and it could drag on until he is gone for nothing. Since re-signing isn't going to be our first priority, he's likely gone. I think the premier FA's will likely sign early and we should trade Lee now, he is our best commodity for a trade. Expiring's and a first rounder, use him to trade JJ/Curry or just to improve the team for the future. I do not want a Lee for 5 years 60M, sorry

All Lee said was that he wanted to stay, wanted to be a Knick and wanted a fair contract.

Knixkik wrote:The caphold thing is irrelevant, i really don't see what it matters. What this is going to come down to is what big name FA we sign and who is the best fit next to them. Again, i fail to see the major difference between lee and bosh or lee and amare. They are better players of course, but how much better? Better so that we get rid of a homegrown talent that is much more durable, relies more on skill and less on athletic ability, and continues to improve every year, while taking much less money? It's going to be a tough call. Once again i will reiterate, if lebron says jump, we will say 'how high' but if he is for resigning lee at a good price which i know he would be, then you are making the right move.

not a cap expert, but once we renounce him, we have to resign him under the cap and can not go over it. Look, I think what you're saying is that you want a max FA and Lee...and that's OK. There's lots of Lee fans on her. The plan as I know it is to get max cap space and if we can move JJ and/or Curry we could sign two max FA's. Two max FA's with 5 year deals is what I'm on board with and if dealing Lee gets it done or even lands us a lottery pick then sianara baby.