Moonangie wrote:

Marv wrote:david lee's total package dwarfs amere's.

I don't think they have posed nude in a side-by-side comparison, so you must be talking about basketball. I'd say they're about even on the offensive end. Lee has a clear advantage in rebounding. Amare wins on toughness. Lee was quite the hustle guy, so I give him an edge there, too. Neither do much on defense, but if I were an opposing PG, I'd feel much more inclined to frolic in the lane guarded by Lee than I would if Amare were prowling.

As for the intangibles I mentioned above (i.e., leadership qualities), Amare is leaps and bounds ahead of David. And that's what we sought in signing him: Someone to inspire and lead by example.

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

kam77 wrote:

nyk4ever wrote:if amare's name was ever going to be butchered this was going to be the culprit

Amair
Amire
Amure (really, Andrew?)

Stop hatting.

LOL

this is serious stuff

It's probably a pipe dream to think we'll get Amare, CP and Melo, but it's possible. Possible in a way that another 29 win season with Lee wouldn't be.

BlueSeats wrote:There are obviously scenarios where lee could have been beneficial, but the rebuilding of the Knicks is not complete. Right now Amare appears to be a leader in a way Lee wasn't and a draw for FA's (CP, Melo) in a way that Lee wasn't. I'm all for homegrown talent, and it did hurt to lose Lee, but by any measure he's a support player while we need marque guys, and we stand a better chance of getting them with Amare than Lee.

It's probably a pipe dream to think we'll get Amare, CP and Melo, but it's possible. Possible in a way that another 29 win season with Lee wouldn't be.

I have news for you, no matter what fans, the media, and other players around the league think of scorers like Amare, if Randolph doesn't blossom, reduce his mistakes, and give us the rebounding we gave up with Lee, someone else doesn't give us Lee's assists/playmaking, and Amare doesn't reduce his turnovers/fouls relative to Lee, we are going to win fewer than 29 games.

Amare may be a marquee guy, but this team is not going to be any better than it was last year unless one of the other players really blossoms.

ItalianStallion wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:There are obviously scenarios where lee could have been beneficial, but the rebuilding of the Knicks is not complete. Right now Amare appears to be a leader in a way Lee wasn't and a draw for FA's (CP, Melo) in a way that Lee wasn't. I'm all for homegrown talent, and it did hurt to lose Lee, but by any measure he's a support player while we need marque guys, and we stand a better chance of getting them with Amare than Lee.

It's probably a pipe dream to think we'll get Amare, CP and Melo, but it's possible. Possible in a way that another 29 win season with Lee wouldn't be.

I have news for you, no matter what fans, the media, and other players around the league think of scorers like Amare, if Randolph doesn't blossom, reduce his mistakes, and give us the rebounding we gave up with Lee, someone else doesn't give us Lee's assists/playmaking, and Amare doesn't reduce his turnovers/fouls relative to Lee, we are going to win fewer than 29 games.

Amare may be a marquee guy, but this team is not going to be any better than it was last year unless one of the other players really blossoms.

And how is that any different with Lee than Amare?

ItalianStallion wrote:I don't think Amare and Lee would have worked. Quite frankly, I think signing Amare was the mistake. We paid more money for a player with potentially bum knees that is not much better than Lee (if at all). Amare is a beast of a scorer, but Lee is the better rebounder, much better play maker, and turns the ball over less often. I'd say it's a wash because Amare is not a great defender either.

amare is at least twice the player david lee is. at least. and he's five times the defender. lee got rebounds, but he got them at the expense of ever contesting anyone's shot. amare contested at least five shots tonight that dlee never would have. and i'm a huge dlee fan.

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

I always Liked David Lee even though his defense was suspect. I've found though for big men a lot of great scorers were not great rebounders. Now a few are both. I wish Lee was still a Knick and until AR proves me wrong I will feel that way.

You always insisted with passion that DLee sucks.
Now you like him...
Looks like you will sell you mother to prove you point.

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:I would have liked to see Amare and DLee. I think DLee's near automatic midrange game would have really helped space the floor.

Rebounding is going to be a big problem for us.

that was always my thought. Lee would be the center, and thats certainly not ideal from a defensive standpoint. However your a great rebounding team, and Lee shoots 55% and has one of the best jumpers for a bigman. He's also become one of the best passers and I thought their games would compliment. I also thought it was a good investment. He was an all star with a squeeky clean image, good teammate, super hard worker, etc...

Amarray is clearly the better player and a true go to scorer, where Lee was a guy who played good BB while filling out the stat sheet quite nicely. There is a huge difference in impact there, but I do think they could have complimented each other.

If either one was an above average defender, I think Walsh would have considered it, but Lee CANNOT play center and Amare does not want to, and Amare is a passable defender at best and Lee just plain sucks. It just was not going to work longterm, so Walsh did the best he could. Of all the deals Walsh made last year, the Lee trade was the only one I will say he hit a homerun on.

Amare > David