Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by islesfan:



That's a load of crap. Why would I whine about that trade? How does that go against anything that I've said that I'd like to see happen? I hate Marbury and that would get him out of here. I want them to get a defensive player in the front court and that would get them one. I'm all for Walsh targeting getting under the cap in 2010 and that would drop $20M off their cap in 2010. So what the hell would I be whining about? That's just a lame BS simplistic comment.

Do the Cavs have to prove to LeBron that they're capable of building a championship team around him by the summer of 2010 when he can become a free agent? Wouldn't $20M more in cap space next summer help them do that?

so the plan is to spend an extra $20 million to help the Cavs convince Lebron to stay in Cleveland? that trade does NOTHING for us. NOTHING. ben wallace is washed up. you want slow lateral movement? look at big ben these days. sasha is a decent shooter, but he's not worth $20 million, and he's not worth helping the cavs rebuild.

admit it: if isiah made this trade, you would add it to the pile of teams he'd helped rebuild. i'm all for giving a team cap room a year early - BUT IT HAS TO HELP US, TOO.
[Edited by - crzymdups on 01-07-2008 11:46 PM]

I'm not saying it keeps him there but they sure as hell have to try to improve the team to help convince him to stay. And AGAIN, I'm just throwing out teams that can trade for Marbury after you told us that you went through all the teams and couldn't find any that have contracts totalling Marbury's that end by 2010.

Getting 2 serviceable players who total $20M that comes off the cap in 2010, helps us more than just sending Marbury home.

spending $20 million on payroll in 2009-2010 costs this team $40 million with luxury tax. it has to be REMOTELY worth it for our team to take on that money. why not just use that saved $40 million and buy a few draft picks, even if they are second rounders?

Are you ready to admit that you were wrong and that there are teams out there that COULD trade for Marbury's contract and not take up space on the Knicks cap in 2010?

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by crzymdups:

spending $20 million on payroll in 2009-2010 costs this team $40 million with luxury tax. it has to be REMOTELY worth it for our team to take on that money. why not just use that saved $40 million and buy a few draft picks, even if they are second rounders?

Are you ready to admit that you were wrong and that there are teams out there that COULD trade for Marbury's contract and not take up space on the Knicks cap in 2010?

of course there are trades that work purely financially - but i'm still waiting for a trade that makes sense for the knicks. that makes marbury an actual asset worth keeping around. to my mind, trading marbury for two years of big ben (who d'antoni would hate as an offensively inept player) and sasha is NOT worth $20 million in payroll, plus $20 million in luxury tax. i would MUCH rather spend some of that money buying an extra draft pick in 2009 and having the roster space open.

a trade that works under the cap is fine and dandy, show me something that makes SENSE for the knicks and for their partner. the celtics could get out from ray allen's contract a year early if they traded marbury, but why would they? etc.

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by crzymdups:

spending $20 million on payroll in 2009-2010 costs this team $40 million with luxury tax. it has to be REMOTELY worth it for our team to take on that money. why not just use that saved $40 million and buy a few draft picks, even if they are second rounders?

Are you ready to admit that you were wrong and that there are teams out there that COULD trade for Marbury's contract and not take up space on the Knicks cap in 2010?

of course there are trades that work purely financially - but i'm still waiting for a trade that makes sense for the knicks. that makes marbury an actual asset worth keeping around. to my mind, trading marbury for two years of big ben (who d'antoni would hate as an offensively inept player) and sasha is NOT worth $20 million in payroll, plus $20 million in luxury tax. i would MUCH rather spend some of that money buying an extra draft pick in 2009 and having the roster space open.

a trade that works under the cap is fine and dandy, show me something that makes SENSE for the knicks and for their partner. the celtics could get out from ray allen's contract a year early if they traded marbury, but why would they? etc.

You're not going to accept anything less than an all star in his prime coming back for Marbury so why should I even bother.

Posted by islesfan:


Mardy Collins is also younger and cheaper than Hinrich. What's your point. Neither Collins or Duhon are better than Hinrich.

How is a contract that actually decreases every year until it's $8M in it's last year be an albatross??? No, I'm all for using assets smartly. Marbury and Malik's contracts have nothing to do with their ability to buy draft picks in 2009.

waiving Marbury has everything to do with the mental health of the remaining players on this team and letting them know its a fresh start. to me, that's worth more than trading for devalued players who won't be here long-term.

i don't think marbury for hinrich + gooden is remotely realistic anyway.

it's more important to me to have a healthy lockroom for the next two years and onwards than to get questionable value for marbury's contract.

i would rather have a 25yr old pg in duhon for 11M over two years than big ben and sasha for 40M over two years. duhon has played well in limited minutes, chicago won 47 games in the season duhon and curry both started, duhon has a 4:1 assist:turnover ratio last year, 3:1 for his career. he shoots 38% from 3pt. he is a solid player. to me, it makes more sense to sign him than trade for players other teams want to get rid for one season of cap relief.

i know what you are saying about cap relief, but i think the cap relief angle is severely minimized by the fact that we are only offering one season of relief, because we won't take anything on past 2010.

i have no problem keeping marbury on the books and telling him to stay away from the team, but there is the potential that he complains to the players association and becomes a distraction. if you can trade him in the off-season, fine. i don't want him coming to camp with the team next year though. if you can't trade him by camp, buy him out. and if you do trade him, there better be a reason, not just getting two servicable players for two years. get a draft pick or a player you think has potential. duhon is a stop-gap in some ways, but my feeling is that d'antoni sees more potential in him than that. if you can trade marbury for another such player, fine. but i don't want him with in spitting distance of an official knicks team meeting next season.

Buyout Marbury, save a few million dollars, free a roster spot for a contributing player.
Marbury spent all his credibility over the last few years. If this team is to turn the corner, we need to dispatch that crazy team cancer.

Stephon Marbury's Mouthpiece aka Berman is reporting in the post today that Marbury has been assured he will be in camp in October. I think that's a horrible idea.

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by islesfan:



That's a load of crap. Why would I whine about that trade? How does that go against anything that I've said that I'd like to see happen? I hate Marbury and that would get him out of here. I want them to get a defensive player in the front court and that would get them one. I'm all for Walsh targeting getting under the cap in 2010 and that would drop $20M off their cap in 2010. So what the hell would I be whining about? That's just a lame BS simplistic comment.

Do the Cavs have to prove to LeBron that they're capable of building a championship team around him by the summer of 2010 when he can become a free agent? Wouldn't $20M more in cap space next summer help them do that?

so the plan is to spend an extra $20 million to help the Cavs convince Lebron to stay in Cleveland? that trade does NOTHING for us. NOTHING. ben wallace is washed up. you want slow lateral movement? look at big ben these days. sasha is a decent shooter, but he's not worth $20 million, and he's not worth helping the cavs rebuild.

admit it: if isiah made this trade, you would add it to the pile of teams he'd helped rebuild. i'm all for giving a team cap room a year early - BUT IT HAS TO HELP US, TOO.
[Edited by - crzymdups on 01-07-2008 11:46 PM]

I'm not saying it keeps him there but they sure as hell have to try to improve the team to help convince him to stay. And AGAIN, I'm just throwing out teams that can trade for Marbury after you told us that you went through all the teams and couldn't find any that have contracts totalling Marbury's that end by 2010.

Getting 2 serviceable players who total $20M that comes off the cap in 2010, helps us more than just sending Marbury home.

I can't believe this thread went on this long. Simple answer: trades have to make sense and Marbury for Ben and Pavlovic doesnt.

This is who we currently have at PF and SF: Zbo, Lee, JJ, Chandler, Balkman, Gallo, Rose, Q. And we add a PF (or center) and a poor shooter SF/G?

How does this help the Knicks?