[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

How about Malik Rose and Jefferies to Chicago for Hughes
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
1/9/2009  9:42 AM
that gives us a two guard for two years and Chicago gets cap relief and Jefferies--a player they could integrate on their frontline

Total $ is roughly the same. We also gain nearly 7mm in cap space for 2010
RIP Crushalot😞
AUTOADVERT
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
1/9/2009  9:51 AM
they don't want long term deals. you can offer malik + q and they may do it. but not jeffries.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
1/9/2009  9:51 AM
no no no no i hate hughes!!!!!!
TheGame
Posts: 26651
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
1/9/2009  9:55 AM
NO, NO, NO. We need a SG who can actually shoot. Mardy Collins can probably shoot better than Hughes. Hughes shot is so bad, he asked Balkman to give him 3 pt shooting tips.
Trust the Process
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/9/2009  10:14 AM
i'd do it... nothing for us to lose really... i don't see CHI taking back Jefferies, but Q Rich & Malik for Hughes is a deal i'd make if they offered it... maybe we could squeeze a 2nd round pick out of the deal in exchange for the monetary savings we'd be giving them next season?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
1/9/2009  10:20 AM
Hughes sucks something awful.
However, again, we wouldn't be trading for Larry Hughes to make us better today or with any intent to keep him beyond 2010 - you guys trying to figure out trades to make this sad sack of a roster a playoff hopeful again - are still lost somewhere back in 2005.

WE ARE TEARING DOWN OUR ROSTER. How have some of ya's not gotten that memo?

Therefore you immediately take that trade and RUN because it gets rid of Jeffries' 2011 salary!!!

It doesn't matter what comes back as long as it expires in 2010.

Brad Miller for Curry.

Another AWESOME trade. Why? Cause Curry is 2011 and Miller is 2010. Even though Miller sucks something awful that wouldn't be the point. Not that the Kings would do this I'm just trying to illustrate something here that somehow is still not obvious to a number of fans: WERE TEARING DOWN THE ROSTER so we can REBUILD THE ROSTER the summer of 2010.

Therefore you say HELL YES to Larry Hughes if it's got Jeffries going out in the deal!
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
K22
Posts: 25143
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/18/2006
Member: #1182
USA
1/9/2009  10:25 AM
No thanks, I'm tired of us being the Bulls' dumping ground.
-- the preceding post was brought to you by the letter K and the number 22.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
1/9/2009  10:27 AM
Posted by Cosmic:

Hughes sucks something awful.
However, again, we wouldn't be trading for Larry Hughes to make us better today or with any intent to keep him beyond 2010 - you guys trying to figure out trades to make this sad sack of a roster a playoff hopeful again - are still lost somewhere back in 2005.

WE ARE TEARING DOWN OUR ROSTER. How have some of ya's not gotten that memo?

Therefore you immediately take that trade and RUN because it gets rid of Jeffries' 2011 salary!!!

It doesn't matter what comes back as long as it expires in 2010.

Brad Miller for Curry.

Another AWESOME trade. Why? Cause Curry is 2011 and Miller is 2010. Even though Miller sucks something awful that wouldn't be the point. Not that the Kings would do this I'm just trying to illustrate something here that somehow is still not obvious to a number of fans: WERE TEARING DOWN THE ROSTER so we can REBUILD THE ROSTER the summer of 2010.

Therefore you say HELL YES to Larry Hughes if it's got Jeffries going out in the deal!

yeah yeah i hear you. it's like adjusting to living in a parralel universe.
Cosmic
Posts: 26570
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 3/17/2006
Member: #1115
USA
1/9/2009  10:28 AM
Posted by Marv:

yeah yeah i hear you. it's like adjusting to living in a parralel universe.

LOL I know it.
And again I HATE LARRY HUGHES my god he's awful.
But I have my eye on a different prize. 2010. So, knowing that, and knowing we're going to be horrible this and next year no matter who suits up at this point, it'd be a no brainer.

Chicago has no use for Effries though so...it's nothing more than a good idea.
http://popcornmachine.net/ A must-use tool for NBA stat junkies!
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
1/9/2009  10:50 AM
I was just thinking the same thing last night when I saw the Hughes headline.

We need something like this so that we can resign Nate or Lee through 2010.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
JrZyHuStLa
Posts: 25677
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/5/2007
Member: #1241
1/9/2009  11:12 AM
Hell no. Hughes has been a disappointment ever since his first two seasons.
« Reply To Topic
How about Malik Rose and Jefferies to Chicago for Hughes
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy