Cosmic wrote:Again, those saying we can tell FishLips to opt out and we'll do the right thing and re-sign him to his same money but over multiple years have lost their way. First off the moment he opts out we can then tell him to get lost. There is no legally binding statement you can make to a player to cause them to do that and be protected from getting screwed. Secondly it's against the CBA to negotiate such backroom deals. See Joe Smith. Thirdly, in reverse, revisit Boozer who told Cleveland that if they DONT pick up his option he will sign a long term deal on the cheap - and they let him go - and he laughed and ran to Utah for a bigger contract.

YOU CANT DO WHAT YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING FOR SO MANY REASONS

Yes the moment he opts out you can tell him to get lost, that would be the risk that JJ would take. With Walsh at the helm I would doubt that JJ would fear that the Knicks would pull a fast one and screw him over. That certainly doesn't look good for organizations trying to court FAs.

Joe Smith has nothing to do with this. It's not illegal. The reason why Minnesota was penalized is they had a signed agreement with Smith that circumvented the cap rules. That is not what has been discussed here.

WindsorPl wrote:

Cosmic wrote:
Lastly, anyone praising FishLips for his play recently, are drunk and blind as a result of a good month of basketball. FISHLIPS SUCKS. Anyone wants to take him off our hands for a 2010? MY GOD you jump on that as quickly as possible. THIS CLOWN is not the answer to anything for us!

I agree and disagree with that statement.
JJ has been playing well recently, and praising him does not mean you are drunk. He has helped on the defensive end, I don't think there is a question about that. However, that does not mean he is irreplaceable long term. He is good, but he is not good enough to decline a decent trade (decent piece and/or an expiring contract) by the deadline.

He has played well but over his career he has largely been a pretty mediocre player. In that if any team really does offer us a 2010 for him you do it without looking back. Again, the bigger picture must be looked at, as if we can tell LeBron we can sign him a 2nd max FA of his choosing the chance of landing him increases greatly. I'll take Wade and LeBron over Jeffries and a re-signed Lee and an overpaid Joe Johnson any day. Wouldn't you? And that's really the argument regarding JJ and his salary.

fishmike wrote:not offended at all. But you KILLED this management for taking Gallo. Do you really dispute that? And Lee is MLE player? Sure... good one. I wish you were our GM so we could get a 19/10/57% frontcourt player with the MLE every year. Just calling it like I see it

I was unhappy with the pick due to the continued injury situation. Something that still looms BTW and you can see it in his airballs and late game airballed FTs and his stiff walking at times. He's still bothered. The other side was that he was such an unknown that I did question the pick but I didn't trash the team based on that bit. I was pretty annoyed with the whole injury situation and the way the team swept it under the rug week after week. Who wasn't? Yet, again, I reiterate that I also did praise his one SL quarter, seeing skill there without a doubt, and I also mentioned once that management doesn't always have to hit a homerun with a lotto pick - for if that player turned out to be a solid 6th man - then you scored. I guess you forget or never saw those posts.

Andrew wrote:Yes the moment he opts out you can tell him to get lost, that would be the risk that JJ would take. With Walsh at the helm I would doubt that JJ would fear that the Knicks would pull a fast one and screw him over. That certainly doesn't look good for organizations trying to court FAs.

Joe Smith has nothing to do with this. It's not illegal. The reason why Minnesota was penalized is they had a signed agreement with Smith that circumvented the cap rules. That is not what has been discussed here.

Isn't it a somewhat similiar situation though? Having an agreement with a player to structure their contract in a specific way so you can have more cap space? Didn't Minny keep telling Joe they'd one day give him a max deal but for now he was to accept a minimum deal so they had money to build a team? I mean, if JJ opted out and we re-signed him to this theoretic deal I'm not sure if they can call us for misconduct but it is shady all that same and you know it would be looked into and possibly voided.

Yet, as I said, and as nice as Walsh seems to be, you can bet if he could get JJ or Curry to opt out and lied to them to get them to do so he'd be dancing in the streets as he then tells them, "Thanks, morons! I needed that cap space!"

Again, there is no binding statement that we could make to those guys. In that I don't think either player would entertain the thought. Besides, would you rather have 7M in hand today or be told you'll get 1M per year over 7 years instead? I can't see anyone taking the latter.

Interesting idea, but, I don't think it's plausible for several reasons. I think we can move JJ this year since he is playing well. I think Curry is ours forever.

As it is..Houston has recently suggested they don't want Curry or JJ and their 2011s no matter who we give up. In fact now they seem to want all our youth and all our 2010 expirings for broken down TMac. No thanks.