This from Hoopsworld:

"But more talk is leaking out of MSG, that not only is Spree angry at Scott Layden and the Knicks, that he may again begin pushing the team for a trade, if things begin slowly. Now enter the wrinkles, apparently the common perception of Spree is he is past his prime and overpaid, and with so much money remaining on his deal, and so little star performance on the court. Unless Spree turns it around this season, league sources feel Spree is untradeable, and this may have been said to him on Monday when he met with Knicks leadership. When Spree returns to the court, don’t be surprised to see the long lost passion return, but only so he can get out of NYC."

This kind of makes sense. If both parties want to part, Spree is going to have to step it up. What's good for the Knicks is also good for Latrell. And yet again, Spree is in the drivers seat to his destination.

So, what teams are out there that needs a high energy, slashing shooting guard that also have either a small forward or rugged, defensive center (I am assuming that we could not also include Ward in a trade that involved Spree - too much salary)? Minnesota? I can't really think of any teams that would want to swap. Thoughts?

I think its all speculation and we will see what spree brings to the table when his cast comes off - we will also see what the front office has in store. Thats about all you can really say about this.

FYI on hoopsworld:
They make stuff up. Point blank. I only know because I did some writing for them over the summer. When it was slow people were asked to create topics that will stir conversation and interest, or...make stuff up.

This is all speculation at best. I think the KNicks will keep Spree in town after the players union's decision comes in Spree will find that he was at fault as he broke rules of the union. The Knicks could just as easily have terminated his contract but they didn't Spree has to look at that as a sign that they want him on the Knicks. To trade Spree now would be a big mistake you don't trade players when their value is low, the Knicks know this and they will not trade him. This fine that the Knicks have implemented is good for the organization, it puts Spree in a position to just play the game. It tells Spree that the organization is bigger than the man itself, the Knicks will exist long after Spree is gone I think he realizes that now.

Posted by martin:

This from Hoopsworld:

"But more talk is leaking out of MSG, that not only is Spree angry at Scott Layden and the Knicks, that he may again begin pushing the team for a trade, if things begin slowly. Now enter the wrinkles, apparently the common perception of Spree is he is past his prime and overpaid, and with so much money remaining on his deal, and so little star performance on the court. Unless Spree turns it around this season, league sources feel Spree is untradeable, and this may have been said to him on Monday when he met with Knicks leadership. When Spree returns to the court, don’t be surprised to see the long lost passion return, but only so he can get out of NYC."

This kind of makes sense. If both parties want to part, Spree is going to have to step it up. What's good for the Knicks is also good for Latrell. And yet again, Spree is in the drivers seat to his destination.

So, what teams are out there that needs a high energy, slashing shooting guard that also have either a small forward or rugged, defensive center (I am assuming that we could not also include Ward in a trade that involved Spree - too much salary)? Minnesota? I can't really think of any teams that would want to swap. Thoughts?

Yeah...if Golden State couldn't terminate his contract for attacking the coach, I don't think the Knicks had any chance at succeeding for his bad attitude....not that it would have been in the Knicks best interest to do so anyway.

Posted by Dan1078:

I imagine that the Knicks CANNOT terminate any players contract simply because they dont want him anymore. I believe that that would
defy the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

How about the Knicks just 'terminate' LJ and Luc Longley's bloated contracts?

Posted by nwny:

Posted by Andrew:

Yeah...if Golden State couldn't terminate his contract for attacking the coach, I don't think the Knicks had any chance at succeeding for his bad attitude....not that it would have been in the Knicks best interest to do so anyway.

Posted by Dan1078:

I imagine that the Knicks CANNOT terminate any players contract simply because they dont want him anymore. I believe that that would
defy the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

How about the Knicks just 'terminate' LJ and Luc Longley's bloated contracts?

It's not his bad attitude or "simply because they don’t want him anymore" as Dan1078 said. It's because his contract stats he needs to inform the team of injuries immediately. That’s why they could have terminated his contract.

But our management isnt that stupid :-) Look, this is not a win situation for anyone involved. Especially since this team is lacking a true leader, we dont need the chemistry poisoned by some bad decisions. They all need to put this behind them, get rid of the drama, and get back to some basketball. The Knicks have had far too much to distract them over the past 2 years - its time they started playing and stopped thinking so much.

First, the Knicks have to prove he _knew_ he was hurt and willfully failed to alert the team. That's almost impossible to prove. Common sense may say "How could you not know you had a broken hand?" but it would also say "Why would I walk around with a broken hand for 10 days without treatment unless I didn't know it was broken in the first place?"

I think the fine will be thrown out.

Here's where I think this could actually work out:

Knicks failed to reign him in on stuff he did years passed. They didn't. Now, when they need team mentality the most, he breaks his hand. They know Spree, and know that he will appeal whatever fine they give him and probably get it thrown out. So, instead of using conventional wisdom (appropriate fine, no suspension or banishment) which would just come and go in the papers and get things back to normal, they decide this: "We can't trade him, so he's got to be a team guy, both on court and in the media. The only way we might be able to coax it out of him is to humiliate him. He'll get his fine rescinded, but only after going through meetings and hearings and the media taking shots at him, etc. In effect, we're saying, we're stuck with you and vice versa, so be a good guy or we'll drag your name through the mud, because at this point we've got nothing to lose."

In that scenario, Spree says "Either I make myself trade-valuable or I play great to keep them off my ass the rest of the season." He can start by keeping his mouth shut about personnel decisions and his teammates' lack of effort. Even if we fans agree with his opnions, it's unprofessional for him to share them as a representative of the team.

Anyway, I see Ward and Eisley's inability to push the damn ball as being a bigger issue than Sprewell's political battles. Note to Eisley: no one wants to see you dribble or shoot - if you cross halfcourt and the ball is still in your hands, you've probably failed already.

Originally posted by DefAndReb:
"Note to Eisley: no one wants to see you dribble or shoot - if you cross halfcourt and the ball is still in your hands, you've probably failed already."


Brilliant. And True.