DurzoBlint wrote:if not for Lee's stats, we would have won like 15games. He's the only knick that has produced pretty much night in and night out. If we'd had a decent players at the 1&2 we would imo have been a playoff team.

Shariff was traded from an awful team to a team he was not suited for. Also,injuries had taken a toll on him

i wont agree fully they would win even less, 30 isnt spectacular as it stands. i brought up adbur-rahim to say that putting up stats on a bad team isnt that impressive to me, you could argue the same for him in van: get him better surronding talent, etc. i would say lee has improved on off, can rebound well.

my view is that as lee moves down the preferred options list on offense, his offensive production will likely drop. if that happens, and he remains uncommitted to putting effort into defense, he isnt worth as much of the $$$ the knicks may have to throw his way.

Bippity10 wrote:Was there more than one game this year where David Lee took over the game and carried us down the stretch??

Gallinari, Robinson, Douglas, Chandler I can actually think of a few moments where they put the game on their back when we needed it. I remember David Lee giving consistent effort and stats throughout games but I really don' remember him ever carrying us. If he didn't recieve a great pass from Duhon on a pick and roll he didn't score down the stretch. Again, I love the guy. I want him to be here. But we can't overpay for a guy that lacks that skill.

We lose a lot of close games because we have noone that can score when we really need it.

exactly.

kam77 wrote:Good use of the [code] attribute.

did he put the spaces in?

sidsanders wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:if not for Lee's stats, we would have won like 15games. He's the only knick that has produced pretty much night in and night out. If we'd had a decent players at the 1&2 we would imo have been a playoff team.

Shariff was traded from an awful team to a team he was not suited for. Also,injuries had taken a toll on him

i wont agree fully they would win even less, 30 isnt spectacular as it stands. i brought up adbur-rahim to say that putting up stats on a bad team isnt that impressive to me, you could argue the same for him in van: get him better surronding talent, etc. i would say lee has improved on off, can rebound well.

my view is that as lee moves down the preferred options list on offense, his offensive production will likely drop. if that happens, and he remains uncommitted to putting effort into defense, he isnt worth as much of the $$$ the knicks may have to throw his way.

we are in total agreement on that. Lee at pf will not put up the numbers he put up at center. Hell, against even quicker guys, I think his lack of defense will be magnified.

I just don't want to dump him in favor of Lee2.0 (amare). Imo, the only dif between the 2 is steve nash and how hard amare dunks.

Bippity10 wrote:Was there more than one game this year where David Lee took over the game and carried us down the stretch??

fishmike wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Was there more than one game this year where David Lee took over the game and carried us down the stretch??

Bigs usually dont. Shaq didnt win titles until Kobe. Duncan relies on Parke and Manu to finish. I feel like your frontline should carry for the meat of the game, eating up rebounds, scoring at high %s and when crunch time comes its up to the guards to get you big shots. Ewing never had that player, and when he did he couldnt stay healthy.

A big man needs a guard to get the ball to them but that is different then what I am saying. In their prime you could dump the ball to TD and Shaq and they could carry your team in a one on one post situation. They could dominate the last 5 minutes of a game on the boards and in the post. You could dump the ball to Ewing and he could get you a big shot down the stretch. He could hit 3 or 4 shots in a row in the clutch when his team was struggling. IN those games where the team was flat and struggling to score you could call 4 or 5 plays in a row for Duncan and Ewing and Shaq and they could get the game rolling for you with 3 or 4 hoops in a row.

David Lee is not that guy. David has worked on his game and has improved amazingly. He is an integral part of a winning team. He is a guy that I would love to keep. But for big time money you have to get more. YOu have to have a guy that can get you points or defensive stops when you need them most. To me, that's what you pay 11 and 12 mill for. If you pay David Lee that money then you are guessing that with hard work he could become that player. If he doesn't I'm telling you despite the 20 and 10 he is not worth it. You will need 2 or 3 more legit players to make the team great and with that salary you won't be able to afford them

EwingsGlass wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Was there more than one game this year where David Lee took over the game and carried us down the stretch??

Bigs usually dont. Shaq didnt win titles until Kobe. Duncan relies on Parke and Manu to finish. I feel like your frontline should carry for the meat of the game, eating up rebounds, scoring at high %s and when crunch time comes its up to the guards to get you big shots. Ewing never had that player, and when he did he couldnt stay healthy.

A big man needs a guard to get the ball to them but that is different then what I am saying. In their prime you could dump the ball to TD and Shaq and they could carry your team in a one on one post situation. They could dominate the last 5 minutes of a game on the boards and in the post. You could dump the ball to Ewing and he could get you a big shot down the stretch. He could hit 3 or 4 shots in a row in the clutch when his team was struggling. IN those games where the team was flat and struggling to score you could call 4 or 5 plays in a row for Duncan and Ewing and Shaq and they could get the game rolling for you with 3 or 4 hoops in a row.

David Lee is not that guy. David has worked on his game and has improved amazingly. He is was an integral part of a winning losing team. He is a guy that I would love to keep. But for big time money you have to get more. YOu have to have a guy that can get you points or defensive stops when you need them most. To me, that's what you pay 11 and 12 mill for. If you pay David Lee that money then you are guessing that with hard work he could become that player. If he doesn't I'm telling you despite the 20 and 10 he is not worth it. You will need 2 or 3 more legit players to make the team great and with that salary you won't be able to afford them

I made some changes (for humor's sake) but for what it is worth, I agree with your sentiments entirely.

LOL, I should have said DAvid Lee could be an integral part of a winning team.