knicks1248 wrote:Why would we trade LEE, he's productive, low maintenance, decent salary, high character, really good FT shooter, and a solid vet to have in the locker room.

I don't see the logic in trading him unless your getting something more than what he brings.

Dude is only been here 2 seasons and were entertaining trading him, it's no wonder this franchise is a revolving door.

Jmpasq wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I had mentioned in a previous thread sending him to Minn for Aldrich or Denver for Faried. The key is to get a player on a contract with 1 less year on it to open up the flexibility for next summer. That alone is enough value.

Wow some of these are realistic. Unlike the other thread where we trade the corpse of Noah and Frank for 4 time All Star Demar Derozan.
I still don't think he would fetch anything more than a late 2nd and a bad contract but some of these are for sure worth exploring. However as far as I'm concerned Lee is the least of our problems. Other than trying to find room for more minutes for our youth on the wing we don't need to trade him. His contract isn't terrible and it runs out when Noahs deal ends. As far as i'm concerned I'd be way more interested in getting rid of Hardaway. The main reason I have no faith in this FO is that they didn't draw the line at 3 years for Hardaway jr.. That extra year cripples the Knicks in the summer of 2020 when we could of had opened up the space for 2 max FA's along with a boatload of young players not yet eligible for longer deals. Look at what the Celtics did, they are loaded. They got 2 stars last off-season, one in FA to an already in place Horford. Now they can go over the cap to resign their own FA's. Our FO does not understand these simple advantages built into the cap. Think about it, had the Celtics not signed Hayward last off-season they would of been capped out by resigning Brown, Rozier, and Smart anyway. Hayward was the gravy.
Whatever moves this FO makes I hope they show a quarter of the genius Ainge shows in Boston.

As would I. He's young but this notion that he is going to continue to develop by leaps-and-bounds at 26 years old is nonsense. He is what he will be moving forward, which is an extremely streaky jumpshooter that is a willing albeit flawed defender. That isn't starter material- let alone on a contender- yet THJr is the 28th best paid guard in the league according to Hoopshype. Needless to say, we ****ed up on that one.

My hope is we can move him to a desperate team like the Cavs before the secret gets out (if it hasn't already). I'm going to ask you to bare with me and hold your gag-reflex for this next proposal...how about THJr and the 9th to the Cavs for JR Smith and the 8th?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ycsc42n6

The trade moves us up one spot in the draft but more importantly, it saves us $3 million per year for the next two seasons AND JR's contract expires a year earlier, saving us another $18 million. I would waive JR IMMEDIATELY after the trade! The only reason I'd do it is to create cap flexibility and give younger players the opportunity to play more minutes. I'm personally intrigued with the idea of starting both Mudiay and Ntilikina, while using Dotson as their sub. THJr complicates that and offers no real value to us as a rebuilding team.

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Why would we trade LEE, he's productive, low maintenance, decent salary, high character, really good FT shooter, and a solid vet to have in the locker room.

I don't see the logic in trading him unless your getting something more than what he brings.

Dude is only been here 2 seasons and were entertaining trading him, it's no wonder this franchise is a revolving door.

Nobody is saying we HAVE to get rid of him but at the same time it does makes sense to at least entertain any offers since he does have two years left and we are Trying to have more cap space for next summer. I like lee but we are pretty much set up in the backcourt with younger guys.

I get that, but honestly you need vets like him regardless to where your at as a franchise, rebuild, contender, playoffs. It's veterans like him that help your young guys, especially productive veterans who can still play 70+ games and don't complain about PT or touches.

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Why would we trade LEE, he's productive, low maintenance, decent salary, high character, really good FT shooter, and a solid vet to have in the locker room.

I don't see the logic in trading him unless your getting something more than what he brings.

Dude is only been here 2 seasons and were entertaining trading him, it's no wonder this franchise is a revolving door.

Nobody is saying we HAVE to get rid of him but at the same time it does makes sense to at least entertain any offers since he does have two years left and we are Trying to have more cap space for next summer. I like lee but we are pretty much set up in the backcourt with younger guys.

I get that, but honestly you need vets like him regardless to where your at as a franchise, rebuild, contender, playoffs. It's veterans like him that help your young guys, especially productive veterans who can still play 70+ games and don't complain about PT or touches.

yes you needs some vets but that doesnt mean you turn down a package that gives you cap relief and a decent draft pick. I mean i know you hate to hear this but the knicks are in a rebuilding phase that will last at least another year or 2. If totally fine if lee stays but like i said the knicks are looking forward to the future

Nobody here is promoting the revolving door, entertaining or rejecting offers.

knicks1248 wrote:I get that, but honestly you need vets like him regardless to where your at as a franchise, rebuild, contender, playoffs. It's veterans like him that help your young guys, especially productive veterans who can still play 70+ games and don't complain about PT or touches.

You would be right if Lee had a different contract. The kind of player you are talking about are good for one year "Prove It" deals or two year deals with a team option for the 2nd year.

Giving Lee a 4/48 that passes through his Age 33/34 years at the end is just indefensible.

He's not deficient at anything, but he's not excellent at anything. He's a sub replacement level type wing who will enter the phase of his career where you have to start factoring in injury/missed games. Doesn't mean he will miss them, but it means players at this point need to be shaded to keep some of their effectiveness.

If the Knicks could dump his contract clean without getting ANY POSITIVE ASSETS BACK and didn't take a bad contract back, that would be a full on win here. The Knicks are not getting a positive asset for Lee. No one is giving a pick AND the opportunity cost of the cap space for two years on a sub replacement level wing entering his Age 33/34 seasons. Esp one who cannot create his own shot.

Noah and Lance Thomas have openly ugly contracts. Lee's contract is sneaky ugly. Like a girl who looks good in sunglasses and yoga pants from an angle. Take off the sunglasses and unleash the flab under the yoga pants and then you realize it's not that hittable after all. Phil Jackson pooched this one badly. As I've said before, you don't buy an engagement ring after just one good blowjob.

Jmpasq wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I had mentioned in a previous thread sending him to Minn for Aldrich or Denver for Faried. The key is to get a player on a contract with 1 less year on it to open up the flexibility for next summer. That alone is enough value.

Wow some of these are realistic. Unlike the other thread where we trade the corpse of Noah and Frank for 4 time All Star Demar Derozan.
I still don't think he would fetch anything more than a late 2nd and a bad contract but some of these are for sure worth exploring. However as far as I'm concerned Lee is the least of our problems. Other than trying to find room for more minutes for our youth on the wing we don't need to trade him. His contract isn't terrible and it runs out when Noahs deal ends. As far as i'm concerned I'd be way more interested in getting rid of Hardaway. The main reason I have no faith in this FO is that they didn't draw the line at 3 years for Hardaway jr.. That extra year cripples the Knicks in the summer of 2020 when we could of had opened up the space for 2 max FA's along with a boatload of young players not yet eligible for longer deals. Look at what the Celtics did, they are loaded. They got 2 stars last off-season, one in FA to an already in place Horford. Now they can go over the cap to resign their own FA's. Our FO does not understand these simple advantages built into the cap. Think about it, had the Celtics not signed Hayward last off-season they would of been capped out by resigning Brown, Rozier, and Smart anyway. Hayward was the gravy.
Whatever moves this FO makes I hope they show a quarter of the genius Ainge shows in Boston.

As would I. He's young but this notion that he is going to continue to develop by leaps-and-bounds at 26 years old is nonsense. He is what he will be moving forward, which is an extremely streaky jumpshooter that is a willing albeit flawed defender. That isn't starter material- let alone on a contender- yet THJr is the 28th best paid guard in the league according to Hoopshype. Needless to say, we ****ed up on that one.

My hope is we can move him to a desperate team like the Cavs before the secret gets out (if it hasn't already). I'm going to ask you to bare with me and hold your gag-reflex for this next proposal...how about THJr and the 9th to the Cavs for JR Smith and the 8th?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ycsc42n6

The trade moves us up one spot in the draft but more importantly, it saves us $3 million per year for the next two seasons AND JR's contract expires a year earlier, saving us another $18 million. I would waive JR IMMEDIATELY after the trade! The only reason I'd do it is to create cap flexibility and give younger players the opportunity to play more minutes. I'm personally intrigued with the idea of starting both Mudiay and Ntilikina, while using Dotson as their sub. THJr complicates that and offers no real value to us as a rebuilding team.

Funny you mention this because I have considered this trade myself, I don't think our front office would do it though. I can't see Mills letting go of his prize FA signing. I would do it in a second, although it would piss off Porzingis big time

It wouldn't be the first time a GM hit the abort button this early on a signature deal. We just saw the Cavs give away both Isaiah Thomas and Jae Crowder, a few months after giving up Kyrie afterall. Especially with Perry now in the fold, we can easily rationalize the move away as a change in priorities to justify the decision. Whatever the case, I think getting rid of THJr should be at the top of our agenda before he loses any more of his trade value.

NardDogNation wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I had mentioned in a previous thread sending him to Minn for Aldrich or Denver for Faried. The key is to get a player on a contract with 1 less year on it to open up the flexibility for next summer. That alone is enough value.

Wow some of these are realistic. Unlike the other thread where we trade the corpse of Noah and Frank for 4 time All Star Demar Derozan.
I still don't think he would fetch anything more than a late 2nd and a bad contract but some of these are for sure worth exploring. However as far as I'm concerned Lee is the least of our problems. Other than trying to find room for more minutes for our youth on the wing we don't need to trade him. His contract isn't terrible and it runs out when Noahs deal ends. As far as i'm concerned I'd be way more interested in getting rid of Hardaway. The main reason I have no faith in this FO is that they didn't draw the line at 3 years for Hardaway jr.. That extra year cripples the Knicks in the summer of 2020 when we could of had opened up the space for 2 max FA's along with a boatload of young players not yet eligible for longer deals. Look at what the Celtics did, they are loaded. They got 2 stars last off-season, one in FA to an already in place Horford. Now they can go over the cap to resign their own FA's. Our FO does not understand these simple advantages built into the cap. Think about it, had the Celtics not signed Hayward last off-season they would of been capped out by resigning Brown, Rozier, and Smart anyway. Hayward was the gravy.
Whatever moves this FO makes I hope they show a quarter of the genius Ainge shows in Boston.

As would I. He's young but this notion that he is going to continue to develop by leaps-and-bounds at 26 years old is nonsense. He is what he will be moving forward, which is an extremely streaky jumpshooter that is a willing albeit flawed defender. That isn't starter material- let alone on a contender- yet THJr is the 28th best paid guard in the league according to Hoopshype. Needless to say, we ****ed up on that one.

My hope is we can move him to a desperate team like the Cavs before the secret gets out (if it hasn't already). I'm going to ask you to bare with me and hold your gag-reflex for this next proposal...how about THJr and the 9th to the Cavs for JR Smith and the 8th?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ycsc42n6

The trade moves us up one spot in the draft but more importantly, it saves us $3 million per year for the next two seasons AND JR's contract expires a year earlier, saving us another $18 million. I would waive JR IMMEDIATELY after the trade! The only reason I'd do it is to create cap flexibility and give younger players the opportunity to play more minutes. I'm personally intrigued with the idea of starting both Mudiay and Ntilikina, while using Dotson as their sub. THJr complicates that and offers no real value to us as a rebuilding team.

Funny you mention this because I have considered this trade myself, I don't think our front office would do it though. I can't see Mills letting go of his prize FA signing. I would do it in a second, although it would piss off Porzingis big time

It wouldn't be the first time a GM hit the abort button this early on a signature deal. We just saw the Cavs give away both Isaiah Thomas and Jae Crowder, a few months after giving up Kyrie afterall. Especially with Perry now in the fold, we can easily rationalize the move away as a change in priorities to justify the decision. Whatever the case, I think getting rid of THJr should be at the top of our agenda before he loses any more of his trade value.