I posted part of this in another thread but it was so great I thought I'd post it again.

Trading an unprotected pick in a package for a player of Curry's caliber is horse****. Regardless of what you predict our record to be as a GM, you protect the pick. Keep in mind, we came into the season with the 8th worst record - losing our best defensive player in KT, with a new coach, no starting small forward, and adding 4 young players to play significant minutes. Not to mention, a 22 year old center with minimal defensive and rebounding presence who I absolutely GUARANTEED to "real" fans like Hardcore will NOT get much better this season. At some point, you have to retain some intelligence and give up the Shaq fantasy. When you look at his defensive rotation instincts, poor lateral movement and offensive foul history, how convinced are you that this season is anything other than a crapshoot? And Isiah not insuring that gamble was as disasterous move as any he has made.

That said, the Rose and Francis trades remain unaffected by that blunder. Keep in mind, even if the Curry-Rose-Francis trades were not made and a Marbury dump was accomplished at the deadline, we still don't achieve cap space any earlier. The Francis trade was made independently on an asset level and, as such, was worth the dead weight time until 2007.

The bottom line is certain moves are made to obtain end point players and others to obtain intermediates. Francis is an intermediate chip. Rose is an irrelavant chip brought in to acquire a draft pick. In terms of maximizing return value on expiring contracts, the Rose trade is up for debate but our asset appreciation can't be debated. And the Francis trade is precedent-seting as a landmark deal in terms of valuing expiring contracts - remember Houson got T-Mac for Francis. Isiah gets an A+ or higher for getting Steve Francis.

For the past 2 years, the Knicks have been in asset acquisition mode - snatching talent at literally any price. And without question, Isiah has ****ed up along the way. But now is when the team vision is critical - players have to be targetted and brought in. We have the chips to get it done - we just need the brains to build a cohesive team.

And here is the master plan unveiled. In other words, Isiah, you better do this if you know whats good for you.

2006 Draft day: Trade Jalen Rose (expiring deal) + Nate Robinson (hometown product) + Denver’s #1 (06) + SA’s #1 (06) for Rashard Lewis (player option 08) and Danny Fortson (expiring deal) of Seattle

(Seattle will be coming off a lottery season, with above trade - can add 1 maximum contract in summer 07 and remain 7 mil under a cap of 44 mil)

Early 2006 Summer: Sign Q. Woods for a portion of the MLE and J. Butler to the LLE

Late 2006 Summer: Trade S. Francis (insurance for an Iverson trade, deal ends in 09), Q. Woods and J. Butler to Philadelphia for S. Dalembert and A. Mckie (useless player, 6.5 mil deal expires in 08)

2007 Trade Deadline: Trade J. Crawford and a future 2nd round draft pick for Stephen Jackson of Indiana

Trade S. Marbury and a future 2nd round draft pick for Devin Harris, Marquis Daniels and Jerry Stackhouse (expiring deal, Stackhouse = older, Josh Howard will earn added playing time)

End of 2007: Evaluate Curry and Frye’s progress

S. Dalembert E. Curry J. James
C. Frye M. Rose
R. Lewis D. Lee
S. Jackson Q Rich
D. Harris M. Daniels

You had me with the Lewis trade, which might make sense depending on Seattles financial situation. But you lost thereafter.

The rest of the trades you suggest help know one but us. Why would Dallas break-up a part of their core that has the second/third best record in the league? No way they do that.

And why would Indy trade Jackson for Craw? Jacksons is clearly a better player, defensively, offensively, it just makes no sense for Indy and I can;t see someone as shrewd as Walsh doing this.

By the way, I think McKie plays for the Lakers...

[Edited by - bigbeast on 03-03-2006 2:51 PM]

Posted by bigbeast:

You had me with the Lewis trade, which might make sense depending on Seattles financial situation. But you lost thereafter.

The rest of the trades you suggest help know one but us. Why would Dallas break-up a part of their core that has the second/third best record in the league? No way they do that.

And why would Indy trade Jackson for Craw? Jacksons is clearly a better player, defensively, offensively, it just makes no sense for Indy and I can;t see someone as shrewd as Walsh doing this.

By the way, I think McKie plays for the Lakers...

[Edited by - bigbeast on 03-03-2006 2:51 PM]

well we dont know what things can change between now and then, so I think those trades are pluasible.

If I'm moving Marbury, as I stated before, I'm moving him to Minny for McCants, Griffin (23 yrs old and averaging 2 blks per in only 20 mins)and there first round pick (and two contract to match Marbury's). That makes us younger, more athletic at the 2, more shot blocking up front and a lotto pick.

Devin Harris is a nice propect, but he isn't a pure pg.

[Edited by - bigbeast on 03-03-2006 3:23 PM]

Posted by codeunknown:

The basic idea is we have the talent/assets to overpay for pieces that fit. The construction of the team just must be made appropriately. Do I think we can trade the Francis package for Dalembert - absolutely, iverson is going to be traded in the near future and this affords them the supplementary talent to sustain such a deal. We are overpaying in terms of talent in that deal, Dalembert is limited and can be replaced. Meanwhile Iverson's pseudo-replacement is already there. And needless to say, there are other targets besides Dalembert.

With regard to Dallas, I'm sure that Stackhouse will not last beyond 07. And Daniels has been subpar anyway. It boils down to Harris for Marbury and, as a legitimte contender, that decision shouldn't be too difficult for Dallas to make.

All in all, what I'm trying to say is that you can agree or disagree with my trades, but you really should agree with them.

the only flaw in the plan as I see it is that it is contingent on our players getting better rather than worse over time, under normal circumstances that is a safe bet, but when it comes to the knicks, nothing is garaunteed.

Aright, I completely agree with your assessment of the Curry situation.

HOWEVER....

I wouldnt exactly give Isiah an A+ for the Francis deal.

Yes....I agree, getting more valuable trade assets @ warehouse prices is good, but its just drawing the whole process out even more, making this "rebuilding" take longer and longer.

Maybe it was necessary though, after Isiah f!cked up with the non-protection of the pick. We basically needed SOMETHING of value coming in.


Anyway, as for your plan ---


What's the point of Seattle getting cap space, if it's only in the hopes of signing a player OF Lewis's caliber.

Don't you think they'd just rather keep him? I mean I don't know what Sund is willing to do, but I'd think in the end theyd just rather hold onto Lewis.

Then you have the whole Q Woods/J. Butler scenario. Yes I agree you need to keep both, but "portion of the MLE"...? Cmon man, he can be had for like the LLE, same with Butler.


Now, where I get confused is this whole Francis situation. Was he brought in to make Marbury expendable, or as a future trading chip (b/c he's easier to deal than Steph)???

Either way, NO WAY Philly makes that trade. Just can't see it happening. It's a basic rule that you NEVER trade big for small like that, plus the fact that Francis is like 10 years older than Dally.

Crawford trade I like. Jax has that NY attitude.


Marbury trade --- its not gonna happen. I really doubt it. It's gonna be nearly impossible to deal both Marbury and Francis. 1 is possible, 2 is not.

how about this trade:

Mo T, Jamal Crawford & Nate Robinson for Ray Allen & Damien Wilkins

that gives SEA lots of cap space over the life of Crawford's deal, & gives LB a good young defending swingman who has Knick roots, along w/a star SG to replace whoever is dealt between Marbury or Francis this summer.

depending on how desperate SEA is to unload salary... we got Steve Francis for nothing because ORL wanted to dump his contract desperately... i wouldn't give up anything more than that from a Knicks' perspective, unless they would do a straight up swap of Francis or Marbury for Allen (which doesn't make sense for SEA if they're looking for cap space)

Posted by NYKBocker:

Here is a big diff between our GM and SA...The SA pick we got for the Nazr trade is top 10 protected.



[Edited by - NYKBocker on 03-03-2006 2:47 PM]

Are you seriously comparing a 22 yr old Curry who has the potential to have a ceiling of at least an All-Star to the 29 yr old Nazr Muhammed who is a role player who can't average Curry's present 15 and 6?

^ Okeydokey smokey.