NardDogNation wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

NumberTwoPencil wrote:. . . Curry & Thompson backcourt . . .

Couple problems with that. Thompson was drafted two years after Curry. Also, I can't imagine the Knicks sticking with either of those guys for long. Curry was pretty good his rookie year but he was still learning PG (can you imagine him learning how to be a PG in NY?) and those ankle injuries were a serious concern.

In short, the Knicks might have been able to trade up on draft night to get Curry but I suspect it would have been downhill from there.

So we couldn't have traded David Lee in a sign and trade deal in 2010 for an unprotected 1st in 2011 from the Warriors (i.e. Klay Thompson)? He had established himself as a perennial 20-10 big man and all-star by that point, so I definitely think it was feasible had we not had old man running the show.
As for Curry, all we should've done that season was tank. We had the same record as the Warriors that season but had the tie breaker with them, which gave them more ping pong balls and a pick that was one slot higher than us. Had we dumped Nate Robinson and Jared Jefferies to Sacramento, we would've been bad enough for that to have happened. Whatsmore is that we never would've had to trade future picks in that horrible McGrady deal.

But you're right, we probably would have not been patient enough to develop them. I probably been one of the first guys advocating to sell Curry high when those ankle injuries happened.

David Lee was gonna sign with GS and had all the leverage I highly doubt they would've given up an unprotected first in a sign and trade.

...if that were the case, why was a sign and trade needed? He was an unrestricted free agent; he could have gone their without our help.

lee got 6 years instead of 5 if he had gone outright, and the knicks got a couple of bodies/pick

sidsanders wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

NumberTwoPencil wrote:. . . Curry & Thompson backcourt . . .

Couple problems with that. Thompson was drafted two years after Curry. Also, I can't imagine the Knicks sticking with either of those guys for long. Curry was pretty good his rookie year but he was still learning PG (can you imagine him learning how to be a PG in NY?) and those ankle injuries were a serious concern.

In short, the Knicks might have been able to trade up on draft night to get Curry but I suspect it would have been downhill from there.

So we couldn't have traded David Lee in a sign and trade deal in 2010 for an unprotected 1st in 2011 from the Warriors (i.e. Klay Thompson)? He had established himself as a perennial 20-10 big man and all-star by that point, so I definitely think it was feasible had we not had old man running the show.
As for Curry, all we should've done that season was tank. We had the same record as the Warriors that season but had the tie breaker with them, which gave them more ping pong balls and a pick that was one slot higher than us. Had we dumped Nate Robinson and Jared Jefferies to Sacramento, we would've been bad enough for that to have happened. Whatsmore is that we never would've had to trade future picks in that horrible McGrady deal.

But you're right, we probably would have not been patient enough to develop them. I probably been one of the first guys advocating to sell Curry high when those ankle injuries happened.

David Lee was gonna sign with GS and had all the leverage I highly doubt they would've given up an unprotected first in a sign and trade.

...if that were the case, why was a sign and trade needed? He was an unrestricted free agent; he could have gone their without our help.

lee got 6 years instead of 5 if he had gone outright, and the knicks got a couple of bodies/pick

We took care of him. We needed the cap space for Amare. It was a win-win. We have a reputation of not screwing over our players.

NardDogNation wrote:

sidsanders wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

NumberTwoPencil wrote:. . . Curry & Thompson backcourt . . .

Couple problems with that. Thompson was drafted two years after Curry. Also, I can't imagine the Knicks sticking with either of those guys for long. Curry was pretty good his rookie year but he was still learning PG (can you imagine him learning how to be a PG in NY?) and those ankle injuries were a serious concern.

In short, the Knicks might have been able to trade up on draft night to get Curry but I suspect it would have been downhill from there.

So we couldn't have traded David Lee in a sign and trade deal in 2010 for an unprotected 1st in 2011 from the Warriors (i.e. Klay Thompson)? He had established himself as a perennial 20-10 big man and all-star by that point, so I definitely think it was feasible had we not had old man running the show.
As for Curry, all we should've done that season was tank. We had the same record as the Warriors that season but had the tie breaker with them, which gave them more ping pong balls and a pick that was one slot higher than us. Had we dumped Nate Robinson and Jared Jefferies to Sacramento, we would've been bad enough for that to have happened. Whatsmore is that we never would've had to trade future picks in that horrible McGrady deal.

But you're right, we probably would have not been patient enough to develop them. I probably been one of the first guys advocating to sell Curry high when those ankle injuries happened.

David Lee was gonna sign with GS and had all the leverage I highly doubt they would've given up an unprotected first in a sign and trade.

...if that were the case, why was a sign and trade needed? He was an unrestricted free agent; he could have gone their without our help.

lee got 6 years instead of 5 if he had gone outright, and the knicks got a couple of bodies/pick

They didn't have the money to take him on outright, hence the sign and trade.

Oh see I remember that they did have the money to sign him but they can to a mutual agreement with the Knicks so they could give him the extra year and the knicks got back a couple minor pieces.

mreinman wrote:Dion Waiters with 26 points and 4 assists tonight.

You LaMarcus Aldridge him

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--rockets-aggressively-pursuing-deals-to-use-trade-exception-202526796.html

$8.4mil TPE, it's unfortunate it's Morey and Houston though

NYKBocker wrote:

F500ONE wrote:Rockets want a Deal by December 19th

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--rockets-aggressively-pursuing-deals-to-use-trade-exception-202526796.html

$8.4mil TPE, it's unfortunate it's Morey and Houston though

JR Smith for the exception and Montiejunas?

Not a chance

F500ONE wrote:Rockets want a Deal by December 19th

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--rockets-aggressively-pursuing-deals-to-use-trade-exception-202526796.html

$8.4mil TPE, it's unfortunate it's Morey and Houston though

yellowboy90 wrote:ak47 to the 76ers

Guttierez probably gets waived. Too bad.

F500ONE wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:ak47 to the 76ers

Guttierez probably gets waived. Too bad.

Nets just C-Blocked Phil

Probably stuck with Amar'e for the duration for sure now

Nope, Amare can still be traded for Jason Richardson.

knicks1248 wrote:looks like kyrie is going to miss some major time

Rachel Nichols ‏@Rachel__Nichols · 3h3 hours ago
Kyrie Irving officially has left knee contusion, will return. Just told me "I'm good"