Moonangie wrote:

PresIke wrote:dalembert is too much of a non-offensive factor for this team, and costs too much.

Offense is hardly an issue for us. Stopping PGs from penetration/kick-outs is a BIG problem. He would be a great addition, cost us nothing important, and fill a role. He doesn't really need to score. Do you think Rony is an offensive factor for us? And where would we be without him?

No brainer: If we miss on a Melo trade, we trade for Sammy and move on from there. I am pretty sure Melo is coming to the Knicks one way or another, so the only downside to this is losing Chandler. But we can't have everything.

I don't think we keep Chandler and get Melo no matter what. Melo is supposed to be a Chandler upgrade. Their games are very similar.

Bonn1997 wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:I don't like that guy.

Do you like Curry more than him???

No! haha

BRIGGS wrote:

PresIke wrote:dalembert is too much of a non-offensive factor for this team, and costs too much.

What--he costs nothing in a deal like this but cash. Do a little homework my good man

i admit i didn't realize his deal ends this year...

however...

in terms of production i don't see how this makes a lot of sense.

the man is averaging 5 ppg, and 6rpg.

i think he could be helpful on defense, but i also feel that we need a big man who can score. turiaf is not THAT much worse than dalembert to make this deal.

we are in trouble with amar'e's technical foul situation and if he gets hurt our team will fall apart because we have no other legit scorer.

the offense is so good very much because of amar'e affecting other people's ability to get better shots. our offense, i suspect, will not be as potent without him.

eddy curry ain't doing jack, yes, but if i'm moving his deal it's not for another ending contract, unless there are zero other options.

if all avenues are gone with moving curry, then i might consider this, but i think we then need to move curry and our endings for something more substantial, if we miss on melo, because there aren't a lot of great options as free agents.

nyshakespeare wrote:Centers dropping like flies around the league,
just drives up the price for Dalembert. This proposal
could have some legs with teams having money trouble.
Cash could be king at the deadline.

You also get 30-40 games with a guy we could possibly keep for 3 more years. I think it would really help.

crzymdups wrote:I'd sign up for this deal.

If we lose out on Melo we need a big and OJ Mayo (can play spot PG and mostly valuable as a guy who can break down folks off the dribble), imho.

Yeah I agree with all of this

PresIke wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

PresIke wrote:dalembert is too much of a non-offensive factor for this team, and costs too much.

What--he costs nothing in a deal like this but cash. Do a little homework my good man

i admit i didn't realize his deal ends this year...

however...

in terms of production i don't see how this makes a lot of sense.

the man is averaging 5 ppg, and 6rpg.

i think he could be helpful on defense, but i also feel that we need a big man who can score. turiaf is not THAT much worse than dalembert to make this deal.

we are in trouble with amar'e's technical foul situation and if he gets hurt our team will fall apart because we have no other legit scorer.

the offense is so good very much because of amar'e affecting other people's ability to get better shots. our offense, i suspect, will not be as potent without him.

eddy curry ain't doing jack, yes, but if i'm moving his deal it's not for another ending contract, unless there are zero other options.

if all avenues are gone with moving curry, then i might consider this, but i think we then need to move curry and our endings for something more substantial, if we miss on melo, because there aren't a lot of great options as free agents.

That's a good point. This deal does make us better but I'd hope we can find better uses for Eddy's expiring contract than this deal.