Posted by Paladin55:

Posted by McK1:


...you do realize Grant Hill is a year or so away from retiring right?


...shaq is where grant should be sniffing at for his last contract - a title contender.

Maybe you should put this out on your Twitter account- I'm sure Hill is a follower of yours.


One would assume that Hill has his reasons for talking to the Knicks. Either he wants to play here for some reason, or he is using us as leverage with another team. Either way I'm not sure he needs your advice on this decision.

And if he doesn't sign with anyone at least he is eligible for Social Security benefits next year- right?

Posted by McK1:

Posted by Paladin55:

Posted by McK1:


...you do realize Grant Hill is a year or so away from retiring right?


...shaq is where grant should be sniffing at for his last contract - a title contender.

Maybe you should put this out on your Twitter account- I'm sure Hill is a follower of yours.


One would assume that Hill has his reasons for talking to the Knicks. Either he wants to play here for some reason, or he is using us as leverage with another team. Either way I'm not sure he needs your advice on this decision.

And if he doesn't sign with anyone at least he is eligible for Social Security benefits next year- right?

grant is talking to ny because of the 2 mil more he is reportedly being offered by the Knicks. My question is why are the newly rebuilding Knicks talking to 37 yr old grant hill?

what value does he have to a 50 loss team? W' Altoni thinks Chandler and Gallo need his mentorship, then hire him as an assistant coach. Paying him to play here with the current state of the franchise makes zero sense.

I think that a lot of posters in this thread have given some very legit reasons why he would be a good pick-up:

He can still play and knows the system

He can be an on the court and bench mentor on a team which now has a number of young players on it and no real veteran leader

He can give us the flexibility to make other deals


If you look at this team as it is presently constituted, we don't have a true veteran leader- a guy who has played at the level Hill has played at and is also seen as a respected elder who does the right thing on and off the court. And don't discount the fact that Hill can still play at a high level of quality- he has more value as a guy who can show how its done on the court in a game situation, than a coach, who can only tell a young player how to do things.

I could live with the Hill pick-up, and live without it, but on the whole it seems like a low risk move with few negative consequences that I can think of (With our luck he is injured the first pre-season game and is out for the season.). The minutes he takes from Gallo and Wilson are not major, and are offset by the fact that they can learn from Hill, and considering the fact that BOTH of them are coming off of injuries, having a guy like Hill allows them to work themselves into playing shape without the Knicks having to rush them.

Posted by McK1:

the knicks need players who will be here beyond this season moreso than a "veteran leader" at this point.

Take a look at the contract situation. Chandler, Gallo, Curry and Jeffries are the only guaranteed contracts thru next season and the plan is to lose one or both of Jeffries and Curry.

We have the mid only this year to add 1 or 2 guys with long term potential to stick. even if ny comes in at about 30 mil next season, thats still room to sign your 2 max guys or 3 near max guys. However there will be no mle to use in addition next season. perhaps we extend Al but he cancers when he isn't a primary option so he may be allowed to walk, too.

if we were the bobcats with a core rotation of 7-8 guys signed thru the next 3 seasons then I could understand hill. however the ny roster is in total flux. the mle and lle signee needs to have a 2-3 year life span at least, not 1, 1 1/2.

i bet they keep duhon around and the two first round kids from this year. and we all know lee is going to be here.

Posted by McK1:

Posted by Bonn1997:

McK1: Do you think we need to put together a winning (or at least respectable) season for free agents to want to come here? I'm not sure we do but many others think we do, and Hill definitely helps with that.

no.

anybody who might actually lead NY deep into the play-offs IMO will come if there are guys on the roster they believe they can win titles with.

10 years ago, "playing in NY" was optimal for max exposure. Now, Stern has expanded the nba product enough to where the Thunder have just as good a shot of getting 2 max guys to come play with them as ny does. durant harden and westbrook, 2 probable lottery picks next year, cap room and stern's urging may land at least one big name in that market

Posted by martin:

Posted by McK1:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by Marv:

mck1 giving pharzeone a tough run for his money in the tight race of "who can come up with the most immediate knee-jerk negative reactions to any topic regarding the knicks."

carry on.

That's been clear as day to see for the last 2 weeks.

There is nothing positive to bringing in a 40 yr old who thinks he is still a starter at wil and gallo's position. Why pretend because its pringles and walsh capi-taning the ship the showgirls mentality of nba players will just automatically vanish and everybody will get along like the lollipop guild. Dipping into the mid for a lle vet who plays at a position of strength when there are younger free agents out there that actually fill a need is stupid on top of pointless.

25=30
36=40

Posted by sebstar:

What's the big deal with giving this guy a one year deal? He's a good guy, a savvy veteran, and will no doubt infect the locker room with a more professional vibe.

Posted by Allanfan20:

Posted by sebstar:

What's the big deal with giving this guy a one year deal? He's a good guy, a savvy veteran, and will no doubt infect the locker room with a more professional vibe.

Yup. And he can still play a little AND he's played for D'Antoni already. I bet he would be named captain instantly. I wouldn't be against it either.