toronto and ny were talking for weeks about a rose for penny deal. toronto will DO THIS DEAL TODAY but the knicks have backed off as of late. he has not spoken to isiah about this but from the people he has talked to said the knicks are backing off.

Well, it sounds like we will see what Penny has left in the tank tonight and that deal should be there throughout the season if the teams decide to pull the trigger.

Posted by martin:

I gotta believe that the Knicks also want a #1 pick for a Penny/Rose swap. Also, they want to put some feelers out there to understand what Penny's contract will command at the trade deadline. Heck, there may be a gentleman's agreement with AD not to cut/trade him so Penny would be the only Knick expiring contract offer.

Yeah, I forgot about that. Pennys; contract is gonna be looking really good come january when some teams ares struggling and looking for a new direction to go in.

Posted by Knight:

Posted by Killa4luv:

THis deal would be great for us. We'd have some outside shooting, ball-handling and overall offensive prowess out there. What is the freaking hold up?

I think IT deciding if we are really going to win this year...if it looks bleak there is no use taking on more salary.

yeah I deleted that. I just woke up and posted that and didn't put it into perspective.

Posted by BRIGGS:

of course they would do this deal, but in the nba model--that costs 2 number 1 picks.

in the same sense if we took on rose in a marbury deal we would need compensation of talent of 2 number 1 picks or equivilant. that is the standard model. 2 number 1 picks for 10mm+in salary dump or equivilant [young player of high potential and pick] or giving them marbrury====2 number 1 picks coming to NY--same as what we gave

huh? Are you saying they should be giving us picks or we should be giving them picks in a Rose/Hardaway deal? We get the far better player; they save money. It's a fair deal if no picks are involved. If we're getting picks, we're robbing them.

Posted by Bonn1997:

[quote]Posted by BRIGGS:

of course they would do this deal, but in the nba model--that costs 2 number 1 picks.

in the same sense if we took on rose in a marbury deal we would need compensation of talent of 2 number 1 picks or equivilant. that is the standard model. 2 number 1 picks for 10mm+in salary dump or equivilant [young player of high potential and pick] or giving them marbrury====2 number 1 picks coming to NY--same as what we gave

huh? Are you saying they should be giving us picks or we should be giving them picks in a Rose/Hardaway deal? We get the far better player; they save money. It's a fair deal if no picks are involved. If we're getting picks, we're robbing them.


Nazr was a much more valuable player than Malik rose and we got two picks. Jalen Rose is a pure salary dump. NO team is taking on jalen on that basis. If they want to dump Rose it should cost the same $$$$$ in terms of picks. Its not necessary we have Rose.

Agreed on the two picks. No way we do them a favor and not get compensated.

As far as talent and what rose brings to the court? Knicks win. Rose would start at the three and give the knicks decent offense in all aspects.

Nazr was a much more valuable player than Malik rose and we got two picks. Jalen Rose is a pure salary dump. NO team is taking on jalen on that basis. If they want to dump Rose it should cost the same $$$$$ in terms of picks. Its not necessary we have Rose.

In that trade we got the far inferior player AND the worse contract (2 more years). In the proposed trade, we get a slightly worse contract (1 more year) and the far superior player (Rose put up 17 PPG last year; it takes Penny a month to accumulate that many points).

NO team is taking on jalen on that basis.

Then they'll hold onto him for 8 months when he becomes an expiring contract. They have no reason to give up multiple picks now to get rid of him when he'll be a great trade asset in half a year.