[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Chad Ford: Knicks/Memphis rumor
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34075
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
6/23/2008  4:15 PM
Of the five guards on the roster:
Crawford (for better or worse part of the long term)
Marbury (expiring)
Nate (not definite the Knicks extend him)
Richardson (garbage)
Collins (garbage)

You might not agree with my logic, but it doesn't make it unreasonable that the Knicks could draft two guards to rebuild the guard rotation, when only ONE guard fits into that plans past this season, possibly two if the tweam makes the commitment to Nate.

Yes, the Knicks need a big man. They need everything. But who's available? Kevin "I can ball but may not have the body for the NBA" Love, Brook "what you see is what you get" Lopez, Anthony "I'm a huge gamble in the draft" Randolph, and Roy "I'm only getting drafted this high because I'm tall" Hibbert?
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
AUTOADVERT
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34075
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
6/23/2008  4:17 PM
Posted by Solace:

Drafting guards in the top 10 is generally a bad proposition. If you use a top 10 pick on a guard, you better get a star. Other positions are generally harder to fill with quality players and later picks.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Bigs are harder to find but that doesn't mean you should just draft them. That's what makes Olowkandi a number one, or why even good players like Andrew Bogut or Marvin Williams get taken instead of Deron Williams or Chris Paul.

DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
Uptown
Posts: 31378
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 4/1/2008
Member: #1883
6/23/2008  4:34 PM
Posted by SupremeCommander:

Of the five guards on the roster:
Crawford (for better or worse part of the long term)
Marbury (expiring)
Nate (not definite the Knicks extend him)
Richardson (garbage)
Collins (garbage)

You might not agree with my logic, but it doesn't make it unreasonable that the Knicks could draft two guards to rebuild the guard rotation, when only ONE guard fits into that plans past this season, possibly two if the tweam makes the commitment to Nate.

Yes, the Knicks need a big man. They need everything. But who's available? Kevin "I can ball but may not have the body for the NBA" Love, Brook "what you see is what you get" Lopez, Anthony "I'm a huge gamble in the draft" Randolph, and Roy "I'm only getting drafted this high because I'm tall" Hibbert?

Okay lets say Walsh does use both picks and takes Gordon and Alexander with the picks. Imagine this lineup:

C/ Curry
PF/ Chandler
SF/ Alexander
Sg/ Gordon
PG/ Craw

Obviously craw would have to be disciplined and get others involved first. But this would be a dynamic offensive team. Alexander and Gordon can spread out on the wings, Craw at the top is unguardable, and Curry in the post can't be guarded one on one. Gordon and Alexander are good shooters from the wings which would give Curry space to operate.
knicksbabyyeah
Posts: 21472
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 8/19/2001
Member: #100
Netherlands
6/23/2008  5:08 PM
well trading Lee saves money for the 2010 free agency goal, better have someone on a rookie contract instead instead of someone you have to resign next year.

according to Fran Frashilla

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=21206
Tab, Toronto: Hi Fran, Which player does a free fall on draft day? Any chance Gallinari falls to to the Raps?

SportsNation Fran Fraschilla: (3:58 PM ET ) Unfortunately, no way. Despite all the smoke and mirrors, I think the Knicks will take him at No. 6. While I like Andrea Bargnani, Gallinari is a completely different player. He's a small forward who can attack the basket, shoot it from deep, handle the ball and plays with a toughness uncommon for a 19-year-old, international player.

So perhaps it would be Gallinari and Mayo/Westbrook/Bayless

C/ Curry
PF/ ZRandolph
SF/ Gallinari
G/ Crawford
G/ Mayo/Westbrook/Bayless

who knows?
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/23/2008  5:10 PM
Posted by SupremeCommander:

Of the five guards on the roster:
Crawford (for better or worse part of the long term)
Marbury (expiring)
Nate (not definite the Knicks extend him)
Richardson (garbage)
Collins (garbage)

You might not agree with my logic, but it doesn't make it unreasonable that the Knicks could draft two guards to rebuild the guard rotation, when only ONE guard fits into that plans past this season, possibly two if the tweam makes the commitment to Nate.

Yes, the Knicks need a big man. They need everything. But who's available? Kevin "I can ball but may not have the body for the NBA" Love, Brook "what you see is what you get" Lopez, Anthony "I'm a huge gamble in the draft" Randolph, and Roy "I'm only getting drafted this high because I'm tall" Hibbert?

it doesn't necessarily have to be a bigman like Lopez, Love, Anthony or Jordan... they could just as easily go w/a swingman like Alexander, Gallinari & address team depth that way also... drafting 2 G's when we already have 5 on the roster already makes even less sense than Scott Layden picking Mike Sweetney when we already had 4 undersized PF's on the roster... my guess is if Walsh were to pull something off like this, at least 1 of those picks would be used to unload Zach's contract, or they'd be combined to trade up to 1 of the top 3 spots... i just don't see him taking 2 G's w/2 top 10 picks in this draft.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
6/23/2008  5:27 PM
We should do this trade and take Westbrook/Bayless at 5 and Alexander at 6.

Another option would be to trade pick 6 to the Nets for 10 and 21.

5: Westbrook
10: Randolph
21: CDR

PG Crawford/Nate
SG Westbrook/Nate
SF Chandler/CDR/Balkman
PF Randolph/Randolph/Balkman
C Curry
¿ △ ?
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34075
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
6/23/2008  5:34 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by SupremeCommander:

Of the five guards on the roster:
Crawford (for better or worse part of the long term)
Marbury (expiring)
Nate (not definite the Knicks extend him)
Richardson (garbage)
Collins (garbage)

You might not agree with my logic, but it doesn't make it unreasonable that the Knicks could draft two guards to rebuild the guard rotation, when only ONE guard fits into that plans past this season, possibly two if the tweam makes the commitment to Nate.

Yes, the Knicks need a big man. They need everything. But who's available? Kevin "I can ball but may not have the body for the NBA" Love, Brook "what you see is what you get" Lopez, Anthony "I'm a huge gamble in the draft" Randolph, and Roy "I'm only getting drafted this high because I'm tall" Hibbert?

it doesn't necessarily have to be a bigman like Lopez, Love, Anthony or Jordan... they could just as easily go w/a swingman like Alexander, Gallinari & address team depth that way also... drafting 2 G's when we already have 5 on the roster already makes even less sense than Scott Layden picking Mike Sweetney when we already had 4 undersized PF's on the roster... my guess is if Walsh were to pull something off like this, at least 1 of those picks would be used to unload Zach's contract, or they'd be combined to trade up to 1 of the top 3 spots... i just don't see him taking 2 G's w/2 top 10 picks in this draft.

I defintely don't fault your logic and think it's valid. I just really like the idea of a defensive guard with some playmaking ability and a push-it-down-your-throat point. I think it's dynamic and synergistic and fits the long term objectives of the coach and general manager.

So, in closing, keep on keepin on broseph.
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
King1
Posts: 22993
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/2/2005
Member: #998
USA
6/23/2008  5:37 PM
Lets just remember that Memphis wanted to trade their pick last year for Lee
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34075
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
6/23/2008  5:38 PM
Posted by Uptown:
Posted by SupremeCommander:

Of the five guards on the roster:
Crawford (for better or worse part of the long term)
Marbury (expiring)
Nate (not definite the Knicks extend him)
Richardson (garbage)
Collins (garbage)

You might not agree with my logic, but it doesn't make it unreasonable that the Knicks could draft two guards to rebuild the guard rotation, when only ONE guard fits into that plans past this season, possibly two if the tweam makes the commitment to Nate.

Yes, the Knicks need a big man. They need everything. But who's available? Kevin "I can ball but may not have the body for the NBA" Love, Brook "what you see is what you get" Lopez, Anthony "I'm a huge gamble in the draft" Randolph, and Roy "I'm only getting drafted this high because I'm tall" Hibbert?

Okay lets say Walsh does use both picks and takes Gordon and Alexander with the picks. Imagine this lineup:

C/ Curry
PF/ Chandler
SF/ Alexander
Sg/ Gordon
PG/ Craw

Obviously craw would have to be disciplined and get others involved first. But this would be a dynamic offensive team. Alexander and Gordon can spread out on the wings, Craw at the top is unguardable, and Curry in the post can't be guarded one on one. Gordon and Alexander are good shooters from the wings which would give Curry space to operate.

Like I've said, I really, really like Alexander. I think in three yaers time he's going to be a stud (but stink in the short-term). If the Knicks do end up with two lotto picks and they think Alexander is their guy, I'd love to couple him with Gordon. If they really like Westbrook, I'd love to couple him with Augustin. I just see those pairs being the best possible combination given Walsh and D'Antoni seem to have mancrushes on Alexander and Westbrook.
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/23/2008  5:44 PM
Posted by SupremeCommander:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by SupremeCommander:

Of the five guards on the roster:
Crawford (for better or worse part of the long term)
Marbury (expiring)
Nate (not definite the Knicks extend him)
Richardson (garbage)
Collins (garbage)

You might not agree with my logic, but it doesn't make it unreasonable that the Knicks could draft two guards to rebuild the guard rotation, when only ONE guard fits into that plans past this season, possibly two if the tweam makes the commitment to Nate.

Yes, the Knicks need a big man. They need everything. But who's available? Kevin "I can ball but may not have the body for the NBA" Love, Brook "what you see is what you get" Lopez, Anthony "I'm a huge gamble in the draft" Randolph, and Roy "I'm only getting drafted this high because I'm tall" Hibbert?

it doesn't necessarily have to be a bigman like Lopez, Love, Anthony or Jordan... they could just as easily go w/a swingman like Alexander, Gallinari & address team depth that way also... drafting 2 G's when we already have 5 on the roster already makes even less sense than Scott Layden picking Mike Sweetney when we already had 4 undersized PF's on the roster... my guess is if Walsh were to pull something off like this, at least 1 of those picks would be used to unload Zach's contract, or they'd be combined to trade up to 1 of the top 3 spots... i just don't see him taking 2 G's w/2 top 10 picks in this draft.

I defintely don't fault your logic and think it's valid. I just really like the idea of a defensive guard with some playmaking ability and a push-it-down-your-throat point. I think it's dynamic and synergistic and fits the long term objectives of the coach and general manager.

So, in closing, keep on keepin on broseph.

i think we already have a G that can push the tempo in Nate... all we really need is a defensive G... obviously if we can trade up for a Mayo i think that might be the most logical way to go since he's probably the guy most experts agree has the most star potential of all the guys in the draft other than Rose or Beasley... if we ended up w/Westbrooke & Gordon or Bayless i wouldn't complain but then i'd wanna see a trade made to unload Marbury & either Mardy, Nate, Jamal or Q... the last thing i want is to watch another year of kids we draft languish on the bench cuz veterans who're making more in salary are clogging up the minutes at the same position.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
6/23/2008  7:15 PM
Posted by King1:

Lets just remember that Memphis wanted to trade their pick last year for Lee

You've said this before and I believe it King.

Believe me, the last thing in this world that I want is to see David Lee traded away from the Knicks. Trading Lee for pick 5 and then trading either that or pick 6 to 'Sota for pick 3 I think is something that has to be well thought-out. When you are talking about having a shot at getting OJ Mayo, a guy who can be a prolific scorer in this league, I think it's a move you have to do, no matter who you have to give up to get him. Unfortunately, I think we'd have to give up Lee in order to do that and I think that sucks.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
6/23/2008  10:14 PM
This is BS there is no way a trade goes down. This is just Chad Ford hitting up all the markets to drive draft day ratings. Any rumor coming out of ESPN is horse crap.

[Edited by - Vmart on 06-23-2008 10:15 PM]
TheSage
Posts: 21039
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/20/2003
Member: #386
6/23/2008  10:25 PM
Not as crazy as is sounds. Is anyone at 5 a certain double double as is Lee? They dump the Cardinal salary and resign Lee.
VDesai
Posts: 43301
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
6/23/2008  10:37 PM
Why not trade the 6 and Malik for the 5 and Cardinal rather than trade Lee. Lee = better than the 6th pick especially when we would end up taking Mayo at 5.
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
6/23/2008  10:38 PM
Posted by VDesai:

Why not trade the 6 and Malik for the 5 and Cardinal rather than trade Lee. Lee = better than the 6th pick especially when we would end up taking Mayo at 5.

i don't think there's any way Mayo falls to 5.
¿ △ ?
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
6/23/2008  10:38 PM
Posted by VDesai:

Why not trade the 6 and Malik for the 5 and Cardinal rather than trade Lee. Lee = better than the 6th pick especially when we would end up taking Mayo at 5.

How do you know we'll get Mayo at 5? Or are you just assuming that on draft night, when it comes to pick 5 and if Mayo hasn't been drafted that we pull the trigger on that trade?
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
6/23/2008  10:42 PM
I think you have to consider the source. If you read about this on realgm and hoopshype prior to Chad 'breaking the story' to insiders it would have some validity. If Chad gets the rumor first it rarely has any substance to it
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
6/23/2008  11:00 PM
Posted by CrushAlot:

I think you have to consider the source. If you read about this on realgm and hoopshype prior to Chad 'breaking the story' to insiders it would have some validity. If Chad gets the rumor first it rarely has any substance to it

amen.
¿ △ ?
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
6/23/2008  11:01 PM
Posted by CrushAlot:

I think you have to consider the source. If you read about this on realgm and hoopshype prior to Chad 'breaking the story' to insiders it would have some validity. If Chad gets the rumor first it rarely has any substance to it

Exactly, right now ESPN is going to throw rumors after rumors at the fans of basketball to basically promote the draft day event.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
6/24/2008  12:10 AM
Posted by Vmart:

This is BS there is no way a trade goes down. This is just Chad Ford hitting up all the markets to drive draft day ratings. Any rumor coming out of ESPN is horse crap.

[Edited by - Vmart on 06-23-2008 10:15 PM]

Duh!!!!!

But of course you had many of us pull up a seat at the computer looked at this rumor and then the rest was history....



LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Chad Ford: Knicks/Memphis rumor
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy