MattSuspect wrote:I liked D-Lee and preferred him over Stat, but I'd imagine if we resigned him to something reasonable we would have had to give him up in the Denver trade no?

Good point. The Knicks would've traded a rookie Michael Jordan to get Melo if he was around

gunsnewing wrote:

MattSuspect wrote:I liked D-Lee and preferred him over Stat, but I'd imagine if we resigned him to something reasonable we would have had to give him up in the Denver trade no?

Good point. The Knicks would've traded a rookie Michael Jordan to get Melo if he was around

Lee was traded to free up cap space to try and sign Lebron and Wade or Bosh. If Lee was resigned and traded for Melo then that means we would have been able to keep majority of the picks & or Gallo, Chandler. The reason why the Knicks had to give up so much was because Gallo and Chandler and Mozgov and picks are all unproven oommodoties. Lee on the other hand was a borderline allstar.

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

MattSuspect wrote:I liked D-Lee and preferred him over Stat, but I'd imagine if we resigned him to something reasonable we would have had to give him up in the Denver trade no?

Good point. The Knicks would've traded a rookie Michael Jordan to get Melo if he was around

Lee was traded to free up cap space to try and sign Lebron and Wade or Bosh. If Lee was resigned and traded for Melo then that means we would have been able to keep majority of the picks & or Gallo, Chandler. The reason why the Knicks had to give up so much was because Gallo and Chandler and Mozgov and picks are all unproven oommodoties. Lee on the other hand was a borderline allstar.

No, we signed and traded Lee after we signed Amare. It wouldn't really have made sense to keep both of them together so we made a trade to get some more assets. Of course, as it turned out the best asset we got for him was Turiaf

They signed Amare hoping that it made Lebron consider coming to New York. Lee was never going to be resigned to play with the Knicks.

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

VCoug wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

MattSuspect wrote:I liked D-Lee and preferred him over Stat, but I'd imagine if we resigned him to something reasonable we would have had to give him up in the Denver trade no?

Good point. The Knicks would've traded a rookie Michael Jordan to get Melo if he was around

Lee was traded to free up cap space to try and sign Lebron and Wade or Bosh. If Lee was resigned and traded for Melo then that means we would have been able to keep majority of the picks & or Gallo, Chandler. The reason why the Knicks had to give up so much was because Gallo and Chandler and Mozgov and picks are all unproven oommodoties. Lee on the other hand was a borderline allstar.

No, we signed and traded Lee after we signed Amare. It wouldn't really have made sense to keep both of them together so we made a trade to get some more assets. Of course, as it turned out the best asset we got for him was Turiaf

They signed Amare hoping that it made Lebron consider coming to New York. Lee was never going to be resigned to play with the Knicks.

Right, but Lee was traded after all the big names signed. We didn't trade him for cap space but for the assets we got back which ended up amounting to nothing.

Its all the same to me. He wasn't resigned because of the cap space needed to try and land Lebron and Amare etc.. Then traded later after Amare was signed. That's the same as trading him and then signing Amare, He wasn't going to be resigned reguardless unless we struck out on everyone.

They traded him for Randolph who hasn't done anything with his career, but was still a great trade since we were going to let Lee walk anyway.