Posted by fishmike:

Posted by JohnWallace44:

What is value to the knicks though? Lee and his front court buddies make our overall defense bad enough where its hard to win more than 1/3 of our games.

He's one of the best rebounders the league has seen since Rodman, but if that's not translating to wins, then do you get more value by trading him for picks than by continuing to run him out there even if the contract is reasonable?

We're getting beat by 1.8 blocks per game at the center position alone. That's tough.

I dont know.. what is Bosh doing for the Raps? Maybe Toronto will let him walk for nothing and try over. He's leading them to a worse record that the Knicks have

Are you serious? You have to have some patience man. Teams are built. Yes we are giving up 1.8 blocks a game there. Who are you replacing Lee with? Go get someone that defends the post then.

I cant get my head around this mindset that Lee and Nate are as good as they are going to get and the Knicks are a .400 team so lets just let them go and try again.

We need building block players. We need productive guys that go out and give you numbers every night at every position. Right now Nate and Lee are the most consistant guys that do that.

This team isnt one player away. Its 3-4 players away.

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by JohnWallace44:

What is value to the knicks though? Lee and his front court buddies make our overall defense bad enough where its hard to win more than 1/3 of our games.

He's one of the best rebounders the league has seen since Rodman, but if that's not translating to wins, then do you get more value by trading him for picks than by continuing to run him out there even if the contract is reasonable?

We're getting beat by 1.8 blocks per game at the center position alone. That's tough.

I dont know.. what is Bosh doing for the Raps? Maybe Toronto will let him walk for nothing and try over. He's leading them to a worse record that the Knicks have

Are you serious? You have to have some patience man. Teams are built. Yes we are giving up 1.8 blocks a game there. Who are you replacing Lee with? Go get someone that defends the post then.

I cant get my head around this mindset that Lee and Nate are as good as they are going to get and the Knicks are a .400 team so lets just let them go and try again.

We need building block players. We need productive guys that go out and give you numbers every night at every position. Right now Nate and Lee are the most consistant guys that do that.

This team isnt one player away. Its 3-4 players away.

bosh had them in consecutive playoff appearance and a division title. this year was just a major failure all around. bosh > entire knicks frontcourt combined.

Posted by TMS:

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by TMS:

ur getting way too hung up on Troy Murphy here... the only reason i bring up his name is because IMO they're similar level players in terms of overall production on the floor... the point i'm focusing on here is not comparing Lee's game to Troy Murphy & saying he's a direct clone, but that if u sign Lee to a T Murph level contract then it will become an albatross just like it... u'r not gonna win by having Lee making big bucks on this roster, i'm telling u right now... it limits so much what u can do w/the rest of ur roster that it becomes prohibitive to winning if we're talking those level dollars for what Lee brings to the table.

I guess I am hung up on Murphy because I think Lee is better, a lot better. Lee = Boozer IMO. A walking double double that shoots 50-55% every year. A guy that scores in the paint and can nail a jumper. Boozer is bigger and harder to move on the block, Lee is quicker and more athletic. Lee is a much better passer and can handle the ball.

So here's the question. Is Boozer's contract an albatross? Not in my opinion. I think teams would have lined up for good deals to get Boozer at the deadline if he was available.

ur comparing Lee's stats playing on a 20-something win team to what Boozer's been putting up his entire career playing on playoff contenders? until Lee puts out 21 & 12 type numbers playing on a 50 win team & makes the Allstar team a couple times, he is not Carlos Boozer bro... & even Boozer's contract has been considered by some to be an albatross type contract for the past few years as well... i'm telling u if u sign Lee to a T Murph / Carlos Boozer level contract this offseason it's gonna be extremely tough to move in any deals & will limit our flexibility to make trades for years... if that's what you're looking for then by all means, spend the cap on him & to hell w/the 2010 plan... we will have to agree to disagree on that one.

TMS... amazing how winning changes perception isnt it? Let me resfresh your memory... Jazz owner called Boozer soft, not willing to play hurt and after his first season of 26 wins said signing him to that contract was a mistake. In come Deron Williams and some depth, the Jazz have 2 good seasons in a row and poof! Internet posters everywhere think Boozer is a life long winner!

He's not... (even close)

If Lee was on the Jazz they would be winning 50 games still, and teams with losing records everywhere would be saying we need to get guys like David Lee.

Boozer's records:
17-65
35-47
26-56
31-51 (hurt alot)
51-31 (hurt alot)
54-28

What David Lee does is worth a 5 year $60mm contract. Thats just the going rate man. We could live with letting go of Zach's production because we had Lee waiting on the bench and we got Harrington back. Guys like Lee are not a dime a dozen. He was a great find and does a lot of things beside give you 17/12 and 55% (but thats pretty freakin good).

When the Knicks are as talented as the Jazz and Lee's lack of defense or whatever are keeping us from going to later rounds in the playoffs than we should be looking at other options. But until then we need guys like Lee to get us there.

Knicks are + when Lee is on the floor

Posted by islesfan:

Switch Lee with Varejao and the Cavs aren't nearly as good.

It's not just about numbers.

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by islesfan:

Switch Lee with Varejao and the Cavs aren't nearly as good.

It's not just about numbers.

actually they would be better with Lee.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by fishmike:

Seriously.. This is a good discussion on the topic. Please don't ruin that discussion with your usual "every player is better than whatever knick we are comparing him to" mantra. Plenty of other threads to troll that on.

Fish, I personally don't think Boozer is a good comparison for Lee. I think Boozer is a stronger offensive player and gives you a go to player offensively down the stretch of games. That being said, I think your overall point is fair. I would not want to overpay the guy, but I think as long as you don't committ an Allan Houston type "bid against yourself" situation and you are in the ball park with other teams it's not going to hamstring you. He is still tradeable the following year and with improved play will up his value. Paying market value for young guys is never a bad thing if they are talented. If it takes you out of the running for a 2010 free-agent, okay who cares. You are still building anyway, and 2011 has another free-agent class. It's a big decision what to do with nate and Lee, but it's not as drastic and life threatening as we are making it out to be. The only reason why it becomes drastic is if your mindset is Lebron or bust.

[Edited by - bippity10 on 17-03-2009 4:20 PM]

"You always have a backup plan," Walsh said from his Westchester office on the videotape, in which he answers submitted questions from fans. "I really didn't know what the list of free agents were.

"It wasn't like I was going after LeBron or this guy. It was just, we have to get in the free-agent market. The market in that year, I won't have to pick all the players. The fact we're under the cap will put you in much more flexible position and not strung out over a long period of time where you can't do anything. That flexibility is what I'm focused on, not the who, when and where."