Posted by Bonn1997:

And why are we talking about trading Marbury

Who's "we"? You and Knight? I could come up with some other reasons why the two of you are and always will talk about trading Marbury

Posted by SlimPack:

It would be incredibly difficult if not impossible to trade marbury to a team like atlanta becuase save for joe johnson atlanta has underpaid players while we have overpaid ones.

Atlanta's still under the cap buddy.

Harrington + Delk + Fut. 2nd for Marbury would still keep them just under the cap. And it would give us everything we need - Defensive Vet combo guard for Larry, player of Isiah's liking in Harrington (who incidently is also expiring), and a future "yoot".

Posted by bobs3304:

Posted by Bonn1997:

And why are we talking about trading Marbury

Who's "we"? You and Knight? I could come up with some other reasons why the two of you are and always will talk about trading Marbury

No stupid...

Nixluva asked the rhetorical question.

I'm simply indulging him...


[Edited by - bobs3304 on 11-05-2005 6:04 PM]

Posted by bobs3304:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by bobs3304:

Atlanta's still under the cap buddy.

Harrington + Delk + Fut. 2nd for Marbury would still keep them just under the cap. And it would give us everything we need - Defensive Vet combo guard for Larry, player of Isiah's liking in Harrington (who incidently is also expiring), and a future "yoot".

That's pretty low value for Marbury, though. It's not like we need the cap space (we're still way too high even with that trade).

You're not gonna get much better than that pally. If Atlanta has to swallow all 75 Mill. of his contract you can bet your sweet *** that they won't be giving up massive cap space + full value.

Also, there are 2 scenarios following this -

If we let both Delk and Harrington expire... We'd have Penny, AD, and Marbury STRAIGHT OFF. That's 45 Million. I'm not sure if H20 is expiring also now b/c of his retirement, but I'm assuming maybe not. Either way, in 1 swing we'd be right back to cap respectability.

The other scenario is that Isiah ends up resigning Harrington (b/c it's well known Zeke likes him). We 'd still have cut 11 Million off. I don't know about you, but I'll take that deal in a heartbeat.

It's not the 5 best players on the court that matters....its' the 5 players that play the best together, and Marbury just KILLS the flow and comrodery of the team on the court. He makes the offense stagnant by dribbing too long and not passing quick enough. The team just doesn't gel with him at point. But they do when Jamal is. Craw may not be as talented or efficient or strong as Steph, but atleast I know for a fact that the other players respond better to him...

Well, you just explained why Atlanta may not be a good trade partner. The cap space means little to us, and you say they won't give a lot back since they're taking his massive contract. So, find another partner. Pretty simple, as far as I can tell. Atlanta would have to bid higher than just cap space (which we don't need) if they want Marbury. Al Harrington is nowhere near the player that Marbury is.

As for the cap space, we've shown that we have no goals of getting under the cap. And we'd have to be at least $10 MM under the cap to sign a premiere free agent (which we have zero shot of being far enough under the cap to do). Getting under the cap has never been a Knick priority and probably never will be. So, let's not get carried away here. It's a pipe dream to think that we're making moves for cap reasons. Even if we are, it would take a lot to dig out of the hole that we're in.



[Edited by - Solace on 11-05-2005 7:41 PM]

Posted by bobs3304:

Posted by attaboy2005:

I say trade him and Taylor to Philly for Iverson and Mashburn's contract since it comes off the books end of this yr, maybe through some other garbge in and you got a nice deal.

I say lay off the reefer.

If Nate Robinson starts to look like a snack...lay off it bro.

[IMG_block] http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/8073/jjvision3ed.jpg [/IMG_block]