Let me be clear about my biases - I love Balkman and Lee so would not want to see them traded. I do value Artest's game and think he's a good fit on the court. These comments are assuming Balkman has to be included to make the Artest deal happen. Here are the likeliest scenarios I see happening...

If Trade is Made
This Year - Artest plays well for the most part of this year - we do make the playoffs and lose in the 2nd round to a better team. Balkman gives Sac average stats and great effort off the bench. Artest is extended based on a decent year.

Next Year - Artest starts to complain, and tension wears on the team - we have an ok year - but are no better then the year before. We now have Artest signed to a 3-4 year deal. Balkman starts to improve his jumpshot a bit, and becomes a 12pt, 7rbd, 1.5blk, 1.5 steal player.

If Trade is Not Made
This Year - Balkman improves slightly, but still needs to improve that jumpshot to become starting material. Q.Rich, Chandler and Jeffries cover the 3 position adequately (good defense, limited offense). Artest gets moved at trading deadline to veteran team and plays really well.

Next Year - Depending on Balkman's and Chandler's development, Knicks consider signing Artest to 2-3 year contract. If Balkman and/or Chandler improves enough, there is no reason to pursue Artest at that time.


Questions
Has Artest ever shown the ability to play for the same coach/team without creating problems within 3 years? Chi, Ind and Sac? (Not yet)

How much difference would Artest make for this current team? Are we close where he could put us over the top? (I don't think we're even close without him)

Why lose a hard-working player (Balkman) who may develop a jumpshot and become a starter? What's the safer bet - Balkman gets a jumpshot or Artest becomes (and maintains) model citizenship in the Big Apple?

I just really struggle to see how the Knicks could think the Artest risk is worth when he will be a FA next year... Welcome comments and thoughts

good post. I think that's a good read of the situation.


I think we should wait and see on Artest. this year might be lost to the Celtics before it starts anyway. best to just let the young guys on the team develop another year. if we really want to, we can make a move at the trade deadline with Dickau and Jones' expiring deals.

I think Balkman could be something really special, with a better attitude than Artest.

i think the alternative proposal is obviously how isiah should go.

question:

if the knicks can get artest without having to give up balkman or lee (ie robinson, expiring contracts, possibly malik rose, possibly jared jeffries, possibly future first rounders), would you pull the trigger?

BigSmooth,
Without giving Lee or Balkman up - I think it's worth the risk b/c the Knicks can decide to let his contract expire if he acts up,and they don't lose their future players! I really hope this is the question...

Let me also add this, the whole point of collecting young players is that hopefully they grow and develop into a good cohesive team that can eventually compete for a "Chip". Or you develop them to the point that you can move them to get you that player or players that can help you compete for a championship.

Ainge chose option B. He moved his youth to get the player that he felt was the missing piece to winning a Championship. Its not about, Jefferson being a fan favorite, or a home grown talent, its about winning a Championship. If Ainge didn't pull the trigger, the fans would have their fav Jefferson on the team still, but would be no where near winning a Championship. And Jeffersons presence wouldn't keep them from booing and calling for Ainges head.

I almost get a similar feeling here with Balk. It almost seems like most dont want to move him because he's a favorite (he's mine to). Keep him here, and dont pull the trigger, we are on the outside looking in to the playoffs because 40-41 wins aint getting us the 8th seed in the revamped east. If Isiah feels that Artest puts us right there with the Celts, its hard to argue. That is the whole point, isn't it?

Personally, I would rather wait until Artest is a FA next summer. But, do we really think that Artest would sign for the MLE? I know if anyone is crazy enough to do it, it would be Artest. But I doubt it. So to sum it all up, as you can see, I'm torn on this.

[Edited by - bigbeast on 04-08-2007 10:11 PM]

Posted by bigbeast:

Let me also add this, the whole point of collecting young players is that hopefully they grow and develop into a good cohesive team that can eventually compete for a "Chip". Or you develop them to the point that you can move them to get you that player or players that can help you compete for a championship.

Ainge chose option B. He moved his youth to get the player that he felt was the mssing piece to winning a Chamipionship. Its not about, Jefferson being a fan favorite, or a home grown talent, its about winning a Cahmpionship. If Ainge didn't pull the trigger, the fans would have their fav Jefferson on the team still, but would be no where near winning a Championship. And Jeffersons presence wouldn't keep them from booing and calling for Ainges head.

I almost get a similar feeling here with Balk. It almost seems like most dont want to move him because he's a favorite (he's mine to). Keep him here, and dont pull the trigger, we are on the outside looking in to the playoffs because 40-41 wins aint getting us the 8th seed in the revamped east. If Isiah feels that Artest puts us right there with the Celts, its hard to argue. That is the whole point, isn't it?

Personally, I would rather wait until Artest is a FA next summer. But, do we really think that Artest would sign for the MLE? I know if anyone is crazy enough to do it, it would be Artest. But I doubt it. So to sum it all up, as you can see, I'm torn on this.

Ainge went for all-or-nothing.
If Boston will not make it to at leaste East finals he is gone...
Isiah is no full. He will not put himself in this situation.
He is very much safe to run the Knicks for 4 long years with what it is.
Why he will do this risky move?
If he will - I will need to change my opinion on him from being a snake to being a gambler.
Will see...








[Edited by - arkrud on 08-04-2007 9:59 PM]

[Edited by - arkrud on 08-04-2007 10:00 PM]

Let's be clear about something:


The NBA is ruled by stars. It's not a democracy, this isn't baseball or football. Depth does not rule. Talent does.


It's no coincidence that Shaq and Duncan have won 8 of the last 9 championships.


Then there's guys beneath them, like the Kobes and T-Macs and Melos. And then below even them the Artests. Most likely any teams led by them won't win a championship. Jordan is one of the FEW, and I mean FEW players in NBA history who won a championship as a small guy.



Big men rule the day.


The most the Knicks can hope for is to get deep in the playoffs with a star like Artest (and I mean Artest on his best day).



Would I do it? YES.

But we'd still need more changes, b/c the roster is so irreverently ****ed up as is...

Posted by bigbeast:

^^^
I disagree that he is safe. Obviously Dolan is back to writing blank checks for isiah to cash in on whatever player he wants. But if his dollars dont turn into playoff bids soon, I think Isiah will be replaced. If Isiah is serious about moving Balk for Artest, there is something going on behind the scenes thats making Isiah feel the need to win now. Sure, part of it is because most feel the east is up for grabs, (isn't it ironic that both Ainge and Isiah, 2 of the worst GMS in the east based on production or lack there of, actually feel they have a shot to represent the east in the finals? The east must be really bad) but there has to be more to it.

Dolan seemed to hide his check-book form Isiah last summer and gave him the memorable mandate "1 year to show significant improvement". So we win 33 games last year, and all of a sudden Isiah is handed the check book again? I dont buy it. I think there is another mandate that is just between Isiah and Dolan. Dolan is allowing Isiah to spend again, but I think a playoff berth has to accompany it this year. Thats why Isiah may be desperate enough to trade Balk now, rather than wait til next year for Artest to be a FA. Thats why Frye is gone for a player who is obviously better, but may or may ot fit in. Something else is up.

[Edited by - bigbeast on 04-08-2007 10:24 PM]

[Edited by - bigbeast on 04-08-2007 10:26 PM]

4-year Contract is 4-year contract.
Dolan signed it and he will need to pay it to IT.
It must be very good reason for Dolan to pay IT and somebody else at the same time.
He did it with LB but IT is no LB. Isiah can satisfy Dolan in so many ways but winning games and getting to playoff




[Edited by - arkrud on 08-04-2007 10:53 PM]

Posted by TheGame:

Posted by bigbeast:

^^^
I disagree that he is safe. Obviously Dolan is back to writing blank checks for isiah to cash in on whatever player he wants. But if his dollars dont turn into playoff bids soon, I think Isiah will be replaced. If Isiah is serious about moving Balk for Artest, there is something going on behind the scenes thats making Isiah feel the need to win now. Sure, part of it is because most feel the east is up for grabs, (isn't it ironic that both Ainge and Isiah, 2 of the worst GMS in the east based on production or lack there of, actually feel they have a shot to represent the east in the finals? The east must be really bad) but there has to be more to it.

Dolan seemed to hide his check-book form Isiah last summer and gave him the memorable mandate "1 year to show significant improvement". So we win 33 games last year, and all of a sudden Isiah is handed the check book again? I dont buy it. I think there is another mandate that is just between Isiah and Dolan. Dolan is allowing Isiah to spend again, but I think a playoff berth has to accompany it this year. Thats why Isiah may be desperate enough to trade Balk now, rather than wait til next year for Artest to be a FA. Thats why Frye is gone for a player who is obviously better, but may or may ot fit in. Something else is up.

[Edited by - bigbeast on 04-08-2007 10:24 PM]

[Edited by - bigbeast on 04-08-2007 10:26 PM]

Interesting thoughts. It also might be why IT brought in two SFs when we really did not need one. He might be anticipating that he needs to trade Balkman for Artest and wants insurance at the sf spot in the event Artest goes nuts and we have to get rid of him.

Bingo! Chandler's game is very similar to Balk, minus the high octane energy. Chandler seems to be a good defender, has long arms and can block a shot or two from the wing. Rebounds it at a deceant clip for a SF, is super athletic, can finish strong and his offensive game is a more further along than Balk.

If Isiah makes this trade, getting back Justin Williams would be a good idea. He's an energy player who would solve some of our shot-blocking woes.

Jefferies can cover three positions? Are you kidding me the guy can't even guard one well, he might have had 3 good defensive games all season. You don't trade Balkman or Lee you move Chandler, Nate, Crawford, Morris any combination of those guys.....

Balkman puts up 10pts 8rbs 1blk 1stl if you play him 25 minutes, you don't need a jumper to be effective you need to be active and not take shots away from curry and zach and steph that why him and lee are essential.....

Isiah just has really bad parts and the few good one he has can't be traded for a rental.