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

more curry/knicks stuff
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 4 of 5 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4  5 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
9/7/2005  12:08 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Rich:

I would have rather given Curry the MLE that James got.
The Bulls could just match that. We wouldn't give Curry the MLE unless the DNA test looked good. And if it looked good, then I can't imagine the Bulls losing him for nothing rather than giving him the MLE.



Let them, James is a waste of money.
AUTOADVERT
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
9/7/2005  12:14 PM
Posted by Rich:

I would have rather given Curry the MLE that James got.


I agree. With guys like Stromile, S. Hunter available too, it really seems like the MLE was botched.
¿ △ ?
bobs3304
Posts: 24827
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 7/5/2005
Member: #948
9/7/2005  12:17 PM
Guys, you're not accounting for the BYC rules.

If the Bulls S&T Curry, he's under a base-year contract.

Here's really the only deal I'd consider...

Taylor(9 Mill.), TWO Future 1sts

FOR

Curry (3 Yrs. / 27 Mill.), Pike(3 Mill.)


Here's how it works. Curry is signed to 9 Mill. a year. But that only counts as half, or 4.5, for Chicago. It counts for the whole 9 Million against NY. So NY is bringing in 9 Million, and Chicago is only trading away half of that, or 4.5.....so you have to find a way to balance it out so that we're only 25 % + 100,000$ apart.

Chicago trades 4.5 + 3 = 7.5 Million
Chicago receives 9 Million

NY trades 9 Million
NY receives 9 + 3 = 12


WORKS...


Whether or not Paxson would bite is a whole different story. I doubt he would, b/c we're a division rival...

DLee is the best thing to happen to NY in Isiah's 4 year tenure. And that alone, though a positive on the radar, is sad as hell.
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
9/7/2005  12:20 PM
Curry isnt a BYC because his current salary will be whatever they sign him at. BYC only impacts deals that are extensions. Curry is either getting a NEW contract or is playing for the QA. BYC stuff doesnt enter
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Nalod
Posts: 71899
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
9/7/2005  12:31 PM
Details ruin the rant!

Your such a killjoy with reality
joec32033
Posts: 30629
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
9/7/2005  12:54 PM
Posted by fishmike:

Curry isnt a BYC because his current salary will be whatever they sign him at. BYC only impacts deals that are extensions. Curry is either getting a NEW contract or is playing for the QA. BYC stuff doesnt enter


Fish, in that article, Paxson xplicitly states something about a deal being hard to work out for one of the soul reasons a trade would be so hard is because of Curry's base Year status. The status of Base Year Player is:

If a player signs a contract using 'Bird Rights' in which the player received a 20%+ raise over the previous season, he is considered BYC, and will remain so for a full 12 months unless an intervening event (such as a completed trade) takes place first.
http://www.realgm.com/src_bycplayers.php

Meaning if Curry gets a 20% raise of the whatever mil he earned last year he is BYC.

So if there is a sign and trade he HAS to qualify as a BYC because he will be getting a raise. If he signs for the QO of 5 mil or whatever, Chi-Town can't trade him for the year (remember that is why we couldn't trade for Swift last year).

[Edited by - joec32033 on 09-07-2005 12:57 PM]
~You can't run from who you are.~
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
9/7/2005  4:29 PM
Posted by Rich:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Rich:

I would have rather given Curry the MLE that James got.
The Bulls could just match that. We wouldn't give Curry the MLE unless the DNA test looked good. And if it looked good, then I can't imagine the Bulls losing him for nothing rather than giving him the MLE.


Let them, James is a waste of money.
That's a different debate not worth repeating. Let's stick to the topic. You said you wanted to give Curry the MLE. I'm saying I can't see how that would happen without the Bulls matching, unless Curry's heart condition were very bad, in which case we wouldn't want him anyway.
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
9/7/2005  5:02 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Rich:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by Rich:

I would have rather given Curry the MLE that James got.
The Bulls could just match that. We wouldn't give Curry the MLE unless the DNA test looked good. And if it looked good, then I can't imagine the Bulls losing him for nothing rather than giving him the MLE.


Let them, James is a waste of money.
That's a different debate not worth repeating. Let's stick to the topic. You said you wanted to give Curry the MLE. I'm saying I can't see how that would happen without the Bulls matching, unless Curry's heart condition were very bad, in which case we wouldn't want him anyway.

There are two other possibilities: 1) The Knicks could potentially have doctors that believe that Curry's heart problems have a more optimistic prognosis than the Bulls' doctors; 2) The Knicks could be so desperate for a quality center that they are willing to take a gamble on Curry that the Bulls may not. Afterall, one could argue that investing the same money in James is a bigger risk.
nyvector16
Posts: 21341
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/9/2001
Member: #130
USA
9/7/2005  7:03 PM
I would'nt mind Curry at all..

But I would not give up any of our core (including Sweets and Q).
And I would absolutely NOT give any 1st Round Picks (We sucked long enough under Layden without an influx of young talent).
I would give up a Redundant player and a 2nd Rounder... That's it!
Dude may never play again.. It would be Lunacy to give the bank for someone who may never Don the uniform.
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
9/7/2005  7:25 PM
Curry is an awesome post scorer. He is scary. I wonder how dedicated he is to basketball. He loos unstoppable sometimes especially against teh Knicks. He looks like he can score everytime he gets it.....especially in single coverage.

He needs a change of scenery. I'd love him here in NY. If Paxson want to do another salary dump then fine. Curry still is one of those "potential" guys.

How he gets here that is up to Isiah. Curry would push Frye to Power fwd. Makes for a very talented front court.

I tell you what though......Brown will not tolerate Currys inability to rebound....that is almost a given.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
joec32033
Posts: 30629
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
9/8/2005  11:19 AM
Who would do this trade....Sweets, Mo and a pick for Curry and Piatkowski?

James/Curry
Frye/Rose/Lee
TT(?)/Ariza
Q/Craw
Marbury/Nate
~You can't run from who you are.~
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
9/8/2005  11:23 AM
DONE! I am NOT high on Sweets. Marv will not do it after he saw Curry being pushed around by Sweets. I think Curry will be awesome on the Knicks. Curry, Frye and JJ.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/8/2005  12:09 PM
Posted by Silverfuel:

DONE! I am NOT high on Sweets. Marv will not do it after he saw Curry being pushed around by Sweets. I think Curry will be awesome on the Knicks. Curry, Frye and JJ.

HA! - Someone's a mindreader!

Yes it is true that seeing Curry get pushed around by Sweets is probably my fondest Knick memory from last season.

but even beyond that I don't like Curry. I see him as a variation of the TT model - a stats whore who gives you one burst of scoring consistency and then disappears and has nothing else to offer.

I wouild only want him if we signed him to a JJ-like contract without giving up good playesrs or picks - obviously that ain't happening.

The funny thing is, while Sweets, JJ and Frye all present challenges re: staying on the court, I also think they present potentially great pairings.

JJ at 5 with Frye at 4.

Frye at 5 with Sweets at 4.

2 different looks with great potential balance.

Accentuates why I think Frye is such a vital cog for us.

P.S. I don't want Piatkowski - unfortunately Houston's gonna fill his role of limited minute veteran sharpshooter.

And i don't want to give up a pick.
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
9/8/2005  12:16 PM
Posted by Marv:

The funny thing is, while Sweets, JJ and Frye all present challenges re: staying on the court, I also think they present potentially great pairings.

JJ at 5 with Frye at 4.

Frye at 5 with Sweets at 4.

2 different looks with great potential balance.

Accentuates why I think Frye is such a vital cog for us.


You gotta plug David Lee and Rose in there somewhere. Lots of weapons and the Knicks can change gears....Foul trouble won't be a problem because they will always be a good player coming in to bring support.

Kinda like the Original Bad Boys used to do. They had a deep front court that just came in and gave good support no matter how the minutes were spread.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
Killa4luv
Posts: 27769
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
9/9/2005  5:16 AM
A resigned Curry(for 2 years 20-22 million with the 3rd as a team option) for Sweets and Mo Taylor.

You guys are delusional about Sweets. No one and I mean no one was higher on him than me last year. but lets be real, he doesn't have the star power or low post dominance Curry has.
Sweets and Mo isn't giving up alot to try him out for 2 years, and he could be a star.

our frontcourt would be less cluttered as well.
we'd have 2 centers
James/Curry
3 Power Fowards
Frye/Lee/Rose
2 small fowards
Tim Thomas
Trevor Ariza
2 Shooting guards
Crawford/Quetin Richardson
2 point guards
Steph
Nate Robinson


Thats the kind of balance we need.



[Edited by - Killa4luv on 09-09-2005 05:18 AM]
Caseloads
Posts: 27725
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/29/2001
Member: #41
9/9/2005  6:31 AM
Posted by Killa4luv:

A resigned Curry(for 2 years 20-22 million with the 3rd as a team option) for Sweets and Mo Taylor.

You guys are delusional about Sweets. No one and I mean no one was higher on him than me last year. but lets be real, he doesn't have the star power or low post dominance Curry has.
Sweets and Mo isn't giving up alot to try him out for 2 years, and he could be a star.

our frontcourt would be less cluttered as well.
we'd have 2 centers
James/Curry
3 Power Fowards
Frye/Lee/Rose
2 small fowards
Tim Thomas
Trevor Ariza
2 Shooting guards
Crawford/Quetin Richardson
2 point guards
Steph
Nate Robinson


Thats the kind of balance we need.



[Edited by - Killa4luv on 09-09-2005 05:18 AM]
Sweets is terrible. Never Understood why everyone on here loved him.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
9/9/2005  9:30 AM
sweets is not terrible. at the end of the day, even if he ends up being a 6th man, you still don't move him.

his #'s improved with minutes. that's a fact.
with LB, he'll probably learn how to stay out of foul trouble and LB will utilize his strengths (which means being anchored in the post and not guarding pick and rolls 25 feet away from the basket)
he's 22 and has a post game.
he ABUSED, i repeat, ABUSED curry last year when they went up head to head.
curry can't average more than 7 boards a game at center.

i would like to take a chance at curry, but not if it's going to cost me sweets.

sweets is probably our best frontcourt player right now and unless you can GUARANTEE me that curry will play for the next 5 years, then no way i'm moving sweets for him.

is sweets 20/10 player? who the hell knows but we know he can play 20 mins and give you 10/5. i will utilize the zach randolph example here - they gave him the ball and he exploded. we could have a zach randolph here also (which is why i still don't understand not using him more last mar/apr - but that's another rant).

and y'all know how i feel about the mo taylor deal but to give up sweets + taylor, i can't do it b/c that's BOTH our post up players for a guy that may pull a hank gathers.

they want a sign&trade - then i give them penny + spurs #1 or taylor + spurs #1 + cash.

i'd even do Q for curry straight up with the same exact deal.

but frye, lee, sweets, ariza, & nate are not going anywhere in that deal.

just b/c sweets didn't become a 15/8 player last year (part was his doing, and part was the coaching), doesn't mean we should move him - especially for a high risk player in curry.

this isn't the curry from nov-feb we're talking about now, we're talking about the curry from mar/apr - the one that couldn't get medical clearance to play - the one that won't take a DNA test - the one that's about 30 lbs overweight b/c he won't do bball drills unless he has a guaranteed deal - the one who left an atlanta visit early to go to a bridal shower, the one that seemed to get in shape for his contract season - you get the idea.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
9/9/2005  9:30 AM
Posted by Killa4luv:

A resigned Curry(for 2 years 20-22 million with the 3rd as a team option) for Sweets and Mo Taylor.

You guys are delusional about Sweets. No one and I mean no one was higher on him than me last year. but lets be real, he doesn't have the star power or low post dominance Curry has.
Sweets and Mo isn't giving up alot to try him out for 2 years, and he could be a star.

our frontcourt would be less cluttered as well.
we'd have 2 centers
James/Curry
3 Power Fowards
Frye/Lee/Rose
2 small fowards
Tim Thomas
Trevor Ariza
2 Shooting guards
Crawford/Quetin Richardson
2 point guards
Steph
Nate Robinson


Thats the kind of balance we need.



[Edited by - Killa4luv on 09-09-2005 05:18 AM]

Killa, Curry doesn't play D or rebound. You can't build a team around a center like that.

Sweets has problems, you're totally justified to not be sold on him IMO. But if he does get it fully together it's going to be as a guy who boards, D's and scores from the PF spot. If Curry DOES recover from his heart situation, he's still going to be a center who only scores, and even at that gets intimidated out of low-post postion by a physical defender (like my man fat-ass Sweets )
joec32033
Posts: 30629
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
9/9/2005  10:22 AM
What I don't understand is why everyone is so down with Sweets and down on Curry?

Sweets: 6-8, 275, 8.5 points, 5.4 rebounds, 23 years old
Curry: 6-11, 285, 16.1 points, 5.4 rebounds, .9 blocks, 23 yrs old
and BOTH have defensive issues and if Curry has rebounding issues Sweets is not that much better..

Both have weight problems, one is legit sized center that can play almost 30 minutes a game the other is an undersized power forward who seems to huff and puff his way to 20 mins per. If we can get Curry without Sweets I would do, but I would be alot more willing to give up Sweets in a package for Curry than Q.
~You can't run from who you are.~
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
9/9/2005  10:26 AM
Posted by joec32033:

What I don't understand is why everyone is so down with Sweets and down on Curry?

Sweets: 6-8, 275, 8.5 points, 5.4 rebounds, 23 years old
Curry: 6-11, 285, 16.1 points, 5.4 rebounds, .9 blocks, 23 yrs old
and BOTH have defensive issues and if Curry has rebounding issues Sweets is not that much better..

Both have weight problems, one is legit sized center that can play almost 30 minutes a game the other is an undersized power forward who seems to huff and puff his way to 20 mins per. If we can get Curry without Sweets I would do, but I would be alot more willing to give up Sweets in a package for Curry than Q.


one important stat you left out:

sweets: 20 mins
curry: 29 mins

and the offense flowed through curry.
Page 4 of 5 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4  5 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
more curry/knicks stuff
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