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

I would not rush to trade Chandler
Author Thread
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
8/1/2010  7:10 PM
I agree.
AUTOADVERT
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
8/1/2010  7:34 PM
rvwink wrote:Has anyone considered that the Knicks have a limited list of the players that they can afford to keep, so that they can add the second max signing to their roster? With Amare, AR, Felton and Gallinari, for starters, how can their be room for Wilson Chandler's next contract as well? If we can't keep Wilson past this year, why wouldn't it make sense to trade him for someone that could be a starting shooting for the Knicks, rather than someone whose abilities duplicate an area of strength for the Knicks?

You play to win the game. Lets do 2011 when it comes to it. Wilson Chandler has 0 effect on it. BUT are YOU considering that Wilson might advance to a 19-5-4 level and that he either could become a player we want to retain or that we might just becoming a very solid winning club WITH HIM????????????????? Where is it in-scripted in stone that we have to get another max player?

If we end up losing WC for nothing because their is a vastly superior player--so be it(who cares?). But I think the smart play is to put him @ SG and let it go---there is always the trade deadline the draft S+T or just let him go if need be. The guy just turned 23.

RIP Crushalot😞
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
8/1/2010  9:40 PM
Chandler should be kept a Knick at all costs. There isn't anything superior at sg available. Beside Chandler is better than Rudy that would be a down grade if Chandler is traded for a one dimensional player. Besides I rather Chandler guard players like Wade, Allen and Joe Johnson type of players he is a superior defensive player. Everyone forgets that aspect of Chandlers game the defensive side.
martin
Posts: 76323
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
8/1/2010  9:43 PM
BRIGGS wrote:
rvwink wrote:Has anyone considered that the Knicks have a limited list of the players that they can afford to keep, so that they can add the second max signing to their roster? With Amare, AR, Felton and Gallinari, for starters, how can their be room for Wilson Chandler's next contract as well? If we can't keep Wilson past this year, why wouldn't it make sense to trade him for someone that could be a starting shooting for the Knicks, rather than someone whose abilities duplicate an area of strength for the Knicks?

You play to win the game. Lets do 2011 when it comes to it. Wilson Chandler has 0 effect on it. BUT are YOU considering that Wilson might advance to a 19-5-4 level and that he either could become a player we want to retain or that we might just becoming a very solid winning club WITH HIM????????????????? Where is it in-scripted in stone that we have to get another max player?

If we end up losing WC for nothing because their is a vastly superior player--so be it(who cares?). But I think the smart play is to put him @ SG and let it go---there is always the trade deadline the draft S+T or just let him go if need be. The guy just turned 23.

If Buikake is healthy at the beginning of the season I like him starting at SG over Wilson. Better deep shooter and more natural at that spot. Chandler can come off the bench first at the 2/3/4 with Randolph right after him.

Realistically though my scouting of Buke is like 4 YouTubes and the 2 articles I read about him.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
8/1/2010  9:46 PM
martin wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
rvwink wrote:Has anyone considered that the Knicks have a limited list of the players that they can afford to keep, so that they can add the second max signing to their roster? With Amare, AR, Felton and Gallinari, for starters, how can their be room for Wilson Chandler's next contract as well? If we can't keep Wilson past this year, why wouldn't it make sense to trade him for someone that could be a starting shooting for the Knicks, rather than someone whose abilities duplicate an area of strength for the Knicks?

You play to win the game. Lets do 2011 when it comes to it. Wilson Chandler has 0 effect on it. BUT are YOU considering that Wilson might advance to a 19-5-4 level and that he either could become a player we want to retain or that we might just becoming a very solid winning club WITH HIM????????????????? Where is it in-scripted in stone that we have to get another max player?

If we end up losing WC for nothing because their is a vastly superior player--so be it(who cares?). But I think the smart play is to put him @ SG and let it go---there is always the trade deadline the draft S+T or just let him go if need be. The guy just turned 23.

If Buikake is healthy at the beginning of the season I like him starting at SG over Wilson. Better deep shooter and more natural at that spot. Chandler can come off the bench first at the 2/3/4 with Randolph right after him.

Realistically though my scouting of Buke is like 4 YouTubes and the 2 articles I read about him.

Not happening--not realistic to pencil in a guy off of such a devastating injury and slate him for 30+ minutes from day 1. Hes going to come along slowly off the bench.

RIP Crushalot😞
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
8/1/2010  10:09 PM
martin wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
rvwink wrote:Has anyone considered that the Knicks have a limited list of the players that they can afford to keep, so that they can add the second max signing to their roster? With Amare, AR, Felton and Gallinari, for starters, how can their be room for Wilson Chandler's next contract as well? If we can't keep Wilson past this year, why wouldn't it make sense to trade him for someone that could be a starting shooting for the Knicks, rather than someone whose abilities duplicate an area of strength for the Knicks?

You play to win the game. Lets do 2011 when it comes to it. Wilson Chandler has 0 effect on it. BUT are YOU considering that Wilson might advance to a 19-5-4 level and that he either could become a player we want to retain or that we might just becoming a very solid winning club WITH HIM????????????????? Where is it in-scripted in stone that we have to get another max player?

If we end up losing WC for nothing because their is a vastly superior player--so be it(who cares?). But I think the smart play is to put him @ SG and let it go---there is always the trade deadline the draft S+T or just let him go if need be. The guy just turned 23.

If Buikake is healthy at the beginning of the season I like him starting at SG over Wilson. Better deep shooter and more natural at that spot. Chandler can come off the bench first at the 2/3/4 with Randolph right after him.

Realistically though my scouting of Buke is like 4 YouTubes and the 2 articles I read about him.

I don't understand how you can give Azubuike the nod over Chandler when Chandler is a superior player even at SG. Why is everyone down playing Chandlers abilities and contributions made. Chandler average 17 ppg when he started at sg for the Knicks. Chandler's numbers actually went up when he was starting sg. He is the best two way player on the Knicks how can that player be the a bench player. There is no way that anyone should start ahead of Chandler. Here you have an improving player that is ready for a break out year and people want to reduce him to a bench player. Mess with his improvement and mess with his confidence as a player. For once the Knicks have a player on the right path for success and people want to change his path.

Papabear
Posts: 24373
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 3/31/2007
Member: #1414

8/1/2010  10:19 PM
BRIGGS wrote:Im not worried about value coming back to me next year--who cares--we got value from D Lee right?


When you look at the bottom line Wilson has been and up and coming player who @ 6-8 225 as a nightly mismatch at 2 guard. He makes the unit big and I think with a good PG that some of his inconsistencies(although he shot a rather stout 48%)will be put to bed. Id rather keep him and start him--there is NO rush to move him. I want to see the club go like gallo amare chandler ar felton for 40 games before we make decisions

Papabear Says

This I don't understand why trade him if he is that good and getting better. Keep Chandler and let him become a star. It's just not the name New York Knicks that I like. I would like to see some history with the guys. I would like to see the grow and win in our system. This team we have now they all seem like strangers. I'm not a Boston fan but I like the players and coach better that what we have. I can Identify with them. On the Knicks all I know is Gallo and Chandler. and the fat cat.

Papabear
martin
Posts: 76323
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
8/1/2010  10:21 PM
Vmart wrote:
martin wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
rvwink wrote:Has anyone considered that the Knicks have a limited list of the players that they can afford to keep, so that they can add the second max signing to their roster? With Amare, AR, Felton and Gallinari, for starters, how can their be room for Wilson Chandler's next contract as well? If we can't keep Wilson past this year, why wouldn't it make sense to trade him for someone that could be a starting shooting for the Knicks, rather than someone whose abilities duplicate an area of strength for the Knicks?

You play to win the game. Lets do 2011 when it comes to it. Wilson Chandler has 0 effect on it. BUT are YOU considering that Wilson might advance to a 19-5-4 level and that he either could become a player we want to retain or that we might just becoming a very solid winning club WITH HIM????????????????? Where is it in-scripted in stone that we have to get another max player?

If we end up losing WC for nothing because their is a vastly superior player--so be it(who cares?). But I think the smart play is to put him @ SG and let it go---there is always the trade deadline the draft S+T or just let him go if need be. The guy just turned 23.

If Buikake is healthy at the beginning of the season I like him starting at SG over Wilson. Better deep shooter and more natural at that spot. Chandler can come off the bench first at the 2/3/4 with Randolph right after him.

Realistically though my scouting of Buke is like 4 YouTubes and the 2 articles I read about him.

I don't understand how you can give Azubuike the nod over Chandler when Chandler is a superior player even at SG. Why is everyone down playing Chandlers abilities and contributions made. Chandler average 17 ppg when he started at sg for the Knicks. Chandler's numbers actually went up when he was starting sg. He is the best two way player on the Knicks how can that player be the a bench player. There is no way that anyone should start ahead of Chandler. Here you have an improving player that is ready for a break out year and people want to reduce him to a bench player. Mess with his improvement and mess with his confidence as a player. For once the Knicks have a player on the right path for success and people want to change his path.

I am not discounting Chandler so much as I am hoping for the best from Azubuike. Buike shoots better from 3point land - 40% career shooter compared to 30% from Chandler. And Keleena is no slouch at defense, rounds nearly the same as Chandler and turned the ball over at half the rate. Buike's efficiency is better than Chandler's.

It's the efficiency from downtown that will open up everything down low for Amare and give the pick-n-roll with Felton a TON of room to operate with Gallo and Buike sniping as they have in the past. That patella injury still needs to prove it is healed.

I am still VERY hopeful that Chandler brings it all together this season, and let's face it, he is much younger and has that semi-breakout ability.

We shall see.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Papabear
Posts: 24373
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 3/31/2007
Member: #1414

8/1/2010  10:21 PM
Allanfan20 wrote:I agree. While I would explore possibilities to get real good value in return for Wilson Chandler, the way we did for Lee, I would say stick with him otherwise. He's a valueable player to have, and if we can't get Carmello, we still have a very good player in Wilson in our back pockets.

He's no star though.

Papabear Says

Maybe he will be one one day if we just give the kid a chance.

Papabear
ATrain
Posts: 21487
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2010
Member: #3192

8/1/2010  10:25 PM
Vmart wrote:Chandler should be kept a Knick at all costs. There isn't anything superior at sg available. Beside Chandler is better than Rudy that would be a down grade if Chandler is traded for a one dimensional player. Besides I rather Chandler guard players like Wade, Allen and Joe Johnson type of players he is a superior defensive player. Everyone forgets that aspect of Chandlers game the defensive side.

Agreed. Proficient SG's are scarce in the league right now. Chandler is young and is said to have a good work ethic. I hope we don't trade him anytime soon.

Papabear
Posts: 24373
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 3/31/2007
Member: #1414

8/1/2010  10:27 PM
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

Papabear Says

If this keeps up like getting rid of Chandler for junk or somebody maybe just a good. I'll just watch Boston games a root for them because I've been hearing this crap for 35 years and I'm sick of it.

Papabear
arkrud
Posts: 32217
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
8/1/2010  11:07 PM
Papabear wrote:
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

Papabear Says

If this keeps up like getting rid of Chandler for junk or somebody maybe just a good. I'll just watch Boston games a root for them because I've been hearing this crap for 35 years and I'm sick of it.

Now the truth came up.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
8/1/2010  11:12 PM    LAST EDITED: 8/1/2010  11:13 PM
From The Desk Of The Mayor's Campaign Manager

Wilson Chandler thanks many of you for your generous support. Despite the manufactured rumors of The Mayor's departure, let me assure those concerned that Mr Chandler is working diligently to prepare for he upcoming season of excitement in Madison Square Garden. With that sense of place foremost in his mind, The Mayor is also aware of the disparity between his field goal percentages at home (49.5 per cent overall) and on the road (46 percent). More important, his three point percentages at home (31) and on the road (22) are both receiving extra attention as he rounds into shape.

Bottom line, The Mayor at the tender age of 23 understands he has room to grow. I invite any and all wet fantasy GM's, salivating over including Mr Chandler in your next palm pilot exercise, simply consider a 6'8 gazelle, with a strong work ethic, who averages 15 and 5, and who shoots a solid 48 per cent from the floor... developing his game as a Portland Trailblazer or Oklahoma City Thunder.

To our legions of loyal supporters, I simply say... Thank you for your vote.

Sincerely,

- The Answer Man

once a knick always a knick
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/2/2010  2:33 AM
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

IMO Donnie is in amassing young assets & expiring contracts mode & getting prepared for possible blockbuster deals in the next 2 years... i got nothing against that plan, i think it's a solid plan of action & one that i have been advocating we do for quite some time... i just hope he doesn't let Wilson go with the hope of signing Melo next summer, which to me would be a stupid move to make... you don't give up a player w/Wilson's type of talent unless you know for sure you got the star player coming back in the process, whether that player be CP3, Melo or someone else.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Finestrg
Posts: 27296
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/1/2006
Member: #1069

8/2/2010  8:19 AM
TMS wrote:
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

IMO Donnie is in amassing young assets & expiring contracts mode & getting prepared for possible blockbuster deals in the next 2 years... i got nothing against that plan, i think it's a solid plan of action & one that i have been advocating we do for quite some time... i just hope he doesn't let Wilson go with the hope of signing Melo next summer, which to me would be a stupid move to make... you don't give up a player w/Wilson's type of talent unless you know for sure you got the star player coming back in the process, whether that player be CP3, Melo or someone else.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think we'll wind up going about this exactly like we did with D Lee --- say Melo commits to the Knicks, then and only then will Wilson either be involved in the S&T to get him OR simply allowed to expire with no QO extended..I would think that, like Lee, he'll remain under our control up until the point where we either trade him or renouncing him in favor of a committed upgrade...If I'm wrong then my bad but it sounds like you might be thinking another Jordan Hill/Jeffries/picks gamble trade where there's the risk of no immediate/big-time pay off in the end...I envision something closer to the way we handled Lee. Right up until the end, Lee remained an option for us to bring back.

Sangfroid
Posts: 24681
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/7/2009
Member: #2784

8/2/2010  8:48 AM
Finestrg wrote:
TMS wrote:
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

IMO Donnie is in amassing young assets & expiring contracts mode & getting prepared for possible blockbuster deals in the next 2 years... i got nothing against that plan, i think it's a solid plan of action & one that i have been advocating we do for quite some time... i just hope he doesn't let Wilson go with the hope of signing Melo next summer, which to me would be a stupid move to make... you don't give up a player w/Wilson's type of talent unless you know for sure you got the star player coming back in the process, whether that player be CP3, Melo or someone else.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think we'll wind up going about this exactly like we did with D Lee --- say Melo commits to the Knicks, then and only then will Wilson either be involved in the S&T to get him OR simply allowed to expire with no QO extended..I would think that, like Lee, he'll remain under our control up until the point where we either trade him or renouncing him in favor of a committed upgrade...If I'm wrong then my bad but it sounds like you might be thinking another Jordan Hill/Jeffries/picks gamble trade where there's the risk of no immediate/big-time pay off in the end...I envision something closer to the way we handled Lee. Right up until the end, Lee remained an option for us to bring back.

Here Here! The shoot from the hip, quick trade days are over. Believe it, if they let Chandler go elsewhere, it's gonna be for something a whole lot better

"We are playing a game. We are playing at not playing a game..."
Moonangie
Posts: 24766
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 7/9/2009
Member: #2788

8/2/2010  11:12 AM
I don't want Rudy regardless of moving Chandler. THa's a bad move for us. The Mayor is only 22 years old. Let the boy play a bit (uninjured) and only let him go if it's a blockbuster deal for our second max guy.
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
8/2/2010  11:16 AM
Finestrg wrote:
TMS wrote:
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

IMO Donnie is in amassing young assets & expiring contracts mode & getting prepared for possible blockbuster deals in the next 2 years... i got nothing against that plan, i think it's a solid plan of action & one that i have been advocating we do for quite some time... i just hope he doesn't let Wilson go with the hope of signing Melo next summer, which to me would be a stupid move to make... you don't give up a player w/Wilson's type of talent unless you know for sure you got the star player coming back in the process, whether that player be CP3, Melo or someone else.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think we'll wind up going about this exactly like we did with D Lee --- say Melo commits to the Knicks, then and only then will Wilson either be involved in the S&T to get him OR simply allowed to expire with no QO extended..I would think that, like Lee, he'll remain under our control up until the point where we either trade him or renouncing him in favor of a committed upgrade...If I'm wrong then my bad but it sounds like you might be thinking another Jordan Hill/Jeffries/picks gamble trade where there's the risk of no immediate/big-time pay off in the end...I envision something closer to the way we handled Lee. Right up until the end, Lee remained an option for us to bring back.

The only reason we got Randolph was because we had the bird rights to Lee. Trading Chandler before the season in a deal where we get the inferior talent would be as short-sighted as the due diligence the Knicks did on Lebron James.

RIP Crushalot😞
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/2/2010  12:41 PM    LAST EDITED: 8/2/2010  12:41 PM
Finestrg wrote:
TMS wrote:
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

IMO Donnie is in amassing young assets & expiring contracts mode & getting prepared for possible blockbuster deals in the next 2 years... i got nothing against that plan, i think it's a solid plan of action & one that i have been advocating we do for quite some time... i just hope he doesn't let Wilson go with the hope of signing Melo next summer, which to me would be a stupid move to make... you don't give up a player w/Wilson's type of talent unless you know for sure you got the star player coming back in the process, whether that player be CP3, Melo or someone else.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think we'll wind up going about this exactly like we did with D Lee --- say Melo commits to the Knicks, then and only then will Wilson either be involved in the S&T to get him OR simply allowed to expire with no QO extended..I would think that, like Lee, he'll remain under our control up until the point where we either trade him or renouncing him in favor of a committed upgrade...If I'm wrong then my bad but it sounds like you might be thinking another Jordan Hill/Jeffries/picks gamble trade where there's the risk of no immediate/big-time pay off in the end...I envision something closer to the way we handled Lee. Right up until the end, Lee remained an option for us to bring back.

the T-Mac trade is exactly what i want NOT to do... that was a horrible idea from the very beginning... if they're gonna be trading Wilson they better damn well make sure they get back a star talent in the process... no more dealing away assets on a hope & a prayer that some superstar is gonna sign here a year down the road.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
WindsorPl
Posts: 20413
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/12/2009
Member: #2799
USA
8/3/2010  12:01 AM
BRIGGS wrote:
Finestrg wrote:
TMS wrote:
loweyecue wrote:
TMS wrote:he will be traded

Yes, I think Briggs is right that all these contract talks with shannon Brown and then trade speculation means that sooner or later he will be one. I wish it wasn't so, would love to see him at least get in one full year with this roster and w/o injury issues.

IMO Donnie is in amassing young assets & expiring contracts mode & getting prepared for possible blockbuster deals in the next 2 years... i got nothing against that plan, i think it's a solid plan of action & one that i have been advocating we do for quite some time... i just hope he doesn't let Wilson go with the hope of signing Melo next summer, which to me would be a stupid move to make... you don't give up a player w/Wilson's type of talent unless you know for sure you got the star player coming back in the process, whether that player be CP3, Melo or someone else.

I'm not entirely sure, but I think we'll wind up going about this exactly like we did with D Lee --- say Melo commits to the Knicks, then and only then will Wilson either be involved in the S&T to get him OR simply allowed to expire with no QO extended..I would think that, like Lee, he'll remain under our control up until the point where we either trade him or renouncing him in favor of a committed upgrade...If I'm wrong then my bad but it sounds like you might be thinking another Jordan Hill/Jeffries/picks gamble trade where there's the risk of no immediate/big-time pay off in the end...I envision something closer to the way we handled Lee. Right up until the end, Lee remained an option for us to bring back.

The only reason we got Randolph was because we had the bird rights to Lee. Trading Chandler before the season in a deal where we get the inferior talent would be as short-sighted as the due diligence the Knicks did on Lebron James.

True. The lust over Lebron cost the Knicks Hill and 2 picks. I wonder how much the lust over Melo is going to cost. Like "The decision" never happened.

I would not rush to trade Chandler

©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