Posted by lovespree:

For all those who say we should trade Marbury....my question would be..for who???? Please let me know?

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by lovespree:

For all those who say we should trade Marbury....my question would be..for who???? Please let me know?

capspace

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by lovespree:

For all those who say we should trade Marbury....my question would be..for who???? Please let me know?

capspace

How does that give us cap space? Can we get real?

after 2007

for your reference and elightenment http://hoopshype.com/salaries/new_york.htm

Posted by Bippity10:

So you are under the impression that we were just going to let all these contracts come off the books. Oh you are so naive. With the patience level in NY with fans like you and I calling for the coach's heads with every loss it's never going to happen. We reap what we sow.

Posted by Bippity10:

Zeke isn't the coach but peole are blaming LB for everything.

Posted by Bippity10:

It's more like you are reacting out of frustration and not reality. LB is an all-time coach and calling for his head after 21 games is reactive. No?

Zeke has been more questionable, I agree with you but he is also only 2 years removed from the most horrible, overpaid, ridiculed roster in the history of the NBA. Things were obviously going to get worse before they get better.

I understand many people here's point of view. I respect it. They don't see any future in Curry and Frye and that's fine. That is a fair opinion and I don't disparage it. But to me it is far too early to tell.

My argument is what group of bad teams has a better potential combo than those two? The Celtics? Atlanta? Maybe Toronto? Patience. The draft could not have netted us more potential.

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by lovespree:

For all those who say we should trade Marbury....my question would be..for who???? Please let me know?

capspace

This is the biggest misconception on this board. First of all, if you were an astute observer, you'd notice that Curry's salary isn't tabulated on the Hoopshype page. Thats about 10 million you can add to each year in salary for atleast the next 4 years.

Moreover, imagine the hypothetical scenario where we get rid of Marbury, don't re-sign Ariza, don't sign any free agents for the next 2 years, but don't trade Frye, Lee or Robinson. Our cap number for 07/08 is still 43 1/2 million - meaning we don't have the option of offering a max contract. With the cap limit usually at 42 mil - we are left with 0 capspace in 07/08. Even in 08/09, if we lose Marbury, Ariza and don't so much as glance at another free agent, our cap number is a whopping 39 mil. Thus, the MLE remains our maximum contract offer. Summer 07 - Lebron, Wade and Bosh will get offers of 90+ mil over 6 years. The same applies to Okafor and Howard in 08/09. I'm assuming, if you trade Marbury for capspace - you'd want a superstar in free-agency - that, unfortinately, is a pipe-dream.

we'll have some flexibility to make trades that make us better. Right now we're stuck. nevermind the fact that we'd have some draft picks to work with and a cheaper but more effective PG for Larry to win with

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 12-16-2005 6:37 PM]

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by gunsnewing:


we'll have some flexibility to make trades that make us better. Right now we're stuck. nevermind the fact that we'd have some draft picks to work with and a cheaper but more effective PG for Larry to win with

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 12-16-2005 6:37 PM]

No we won't - trading Marbury doesn't give us additional flexibility. Having young, athletic players gives us trade flexibility. Besides, trading Marbury now has its detriments - namely the fact the our draft picks for 06 and 07 have already been donated to other teams. Id prefer to own the draft pick the year we decide to tank.

theway Marbury is playing we are better without him and a cheaper PG who can run an offense. And I hate the idea of moving Marbury to SG since he'san erratic shooter

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by gunsnewing:


we'll have some flexibility to make trades that make us better. Right now we're stuck. nevermind the fact that we'd have some draft picks to work with and a cheaper but more effective PG for Larry to win with

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 12-16-2005 6:37 PM]

No we won't - trading Marbury doesn't give us additional flexibility. Having young, athletic players gives us trade flexibility. Besides, trading Marbury now has its detriments - namely the fact the our draft picks for 06 and 07 have already been donated to other teams. Id prefer to own the draft pick the year we decide to tank.

theway Marbury is playing we are better without him and a cheaper PG who can run an offense. And I hate the idea of moving Marbury to SG since he'san erratic shooter

He is a erratic shooter but just becuase you play SG doesn't mean you have to be a good shooter. The reason he's talked about moving there is because he can do his thing on offense without HAVING to worry about setting up teammates, the PG could setup the offense/teammates and be the shooter, we can find a PG like that, his name is Chucky Atkins.

ehhh thats not how I invision a true SG. and remember someone has to defend the perimeter