Wouldn't that be rich.

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says
The same reason why someone wanted Zack Randolph, Crawford, and others who left the Knicks. I'm a die hard Knicks fan but I hope Nate does leave and go to a better team. We are always so quick to throw someone under the bus. Nate will grow in this game and I hope he goes someplace where he is appreciated because I hate to say it but next October we will be sitting without Lee or Nate and no Lebron James.

I agree about Nate being under-appreciated. Its a joke how much shyt he takes around here. I too hope he goes to Boston and rips it up and grabs a chip.

But Jamal and Zach had to go. Individually, guys like Nate, Marbury, Jamal, Zach, ext... were all talented but as a collective they were a mess. It was a bloated roster and we desperately needed cap flexibility and a fresh start. We're playing better than we were with those guys and we have a ton of maneuverability to grab an impact player or two.

We're good. No need for pessimism, but I feel you on Nate. Obviously. The fact that we always ridicule our players doesnt help trade value. We should have gotten more for Randolph. Duke is absolutely killing it in Memphis.

Nate's BYC status isn't that difficult to overcome since his salary is so small. All we'd need to do is add more salary into the trade (ie. Jeffries, or if they don't want him, Mobley) so that the 125% leeway rule can cover the fact that Nate's contract only counts for 50% on the receiving end.

Curry Chandler Bayless for Chris Paul anyone?

nate is still byc so he can't be traded to the celtics straight up for any combo of their players because both teams are over the salary cap.

i see. so because nate's salary is not so high, the difference between the 125% of 2$ is possible in that particular instance.

however, why on earth would we make such a trade?

i'm open to moving nate, but not for that.

it could also be that the celtics could make a deal for nate involving a 3rd team.

Jeffries/Nate
for
Scalbrine, Giddens, Daniels and House and their first rounder

We'd probably end up cutting 3 of those guys so the Celtics can just sign them back after 30 days.

nyk4ever wrote:If we could trade Jeffries along with Nate, I'd take the straight up cap relief.

Jeffries/Nate
for
Scalbrine, Giddens, Daniels and House and their first rounder

We'd probably end up cutting 3 of those guys so the Celtics can just sign them back after 30 days.

Nate goes with JJ or no deal. Unless the C's want to include Ray in the discussion

K22 wrote:I don't particularly find it appealing to aid a team (should we make the postseason) we could be facing in the first round.

we wouldn't be facing them in the first round if we traded nate and jeffries.

this is an interesting question donnie will have to weigh - what's more important for the free agency this summer? having $7M more in cap room or making the playoffs. big question donnie will have to answer over the next month before the deadline. i guess it might come down to whether we have a shot at the playoffs come the deadline.

newyorknewyork wrote:I'm stealing this from Realgm, but someone brought up the Idea of Nate and Curry for Ray Allen with the agreement that we would buy Ray Allen out. Allen could then resign back for the vets minimum or something.

I think thats the best Idea I have heard if its legal.

So Boston is going to help stengthen us by giving us more cap space?