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

What I would do this offseason
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
jskinny35
Posts: 21639
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/27/2005
Member: #928
USA
4/17/2009  1:45 AM
1) Offer Nate and Jeffries to see what's available. If this combo could bring either an expiring contract or a decent young player with a reasonable contract (eg Francisco Garcia) - do it. If not, I'd offer Nate to try to get a pick in the 10-20 range. (Take S.Curry if available)

2) Trade Lee for either a)Tyrus Thomas, b)Anthony Randolph, c) Javal McGee or d)Tyson Chandler (in bigger deal) if possible. If not, go after JR Smith and try to do a sign and trade with Denver. (We need a second tier guy who can shoot). If all else fails, trade him for an expiring and/or future draft pick.

3) Offer #8 pick with Curry for expiring contracts. If not, buy out Curry if/when he shows up fat again to training camp. (We wasted a season being undecisive with Steph and don't need any more negativity).

4) Resign Sene and Wilcox to reasonable deals if possible.

5) Put Chandler at the 2 for next season.

Pray for a better draft pick!!
AUTOADVERT
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
4/17/2009  3:47 AM
So you basically want to tear everything down and make room for at least two if not three max contract FA signings in 2010

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 04-17-2009 03:48 AM]
orangeblobman
Posts: 27269
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/1/2009
Member: #2539
Nauru
4/17/2009  5:09 AM
It's good that you're not running the club.
WE AIN'T NOWHERE WITH THIS BUM CHOKER IN CARMELO. GIVE ME STARKS'S 2-21 ANY DAY OVER THIS LACKLUSTER CLUSTEREFF.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
4/17/2009  5:14 AM
the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
4/17/2009  10:32 AM
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

If you can't trade Nate by the trade deadline you are stuck with him and that hurts the 2010 plan. You are cutting it to close to 2010. Nate needs to be gone this off season same with Lee. You are already stuck with Jefferies and Curry no need to compound to those mistakes by adding Nate and Lee to the roster again. The goal is 2010 and the Knicks need to stick to the plan.
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
4/17/2009  10:43 AM
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

If you can't trade Nate by the trade deadline you are stuck with him and that hurts the 2010 plan. You are cutting it to close to 2010. Nate needs to be gone this off season same with Lee. You are already stuck with Jefferies and Curry no need to compound to those mistakes by adding Nate and Lee to the roster again. The goal is 2010 and the Knicks need to stick to the plan.

Has no one heard of S&T? We're so fixated on signing FA outright in 2010 that we forget there is an option for a S&T, in which case both Lee & Nate could be included in a trade for a LeBron, Wade or Bosh.

Cleveland, Miami, Toronto just need to have the real threat of losing their stars for nothing, and then we need their respective agents to arrange the appropriate S&T our way. It is a requirement that we have appealing assets at the right price- Lee & Nate can fit part of that bill.

Its not the end of the world if we have Nate & Lee signed past 2010, as long as their deals are reasonable.
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
4/17/2009  11:07 AM
Posted by franco12:
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

If you can't trade Nate by the trade deadline you are stuck with him and that hurts the 2010 plan. You are cutting it to close to 2010. Nate needs to be gone this off season same with Lee. You are already stuck with Jefferies and Curry no need to compound to those mistakes by adding Nate and Lee to the roster again. The goal is 2010 and the Knicks need to stick to the plan.

Has no one heard of S&T? We're so fixated on signing FA outright in 2010 that we forget there is an option for a S&T, in which case both Lee & Nate could be included in a trade for a LeBron, Wade or Bosh.

Cleveland, Miami, Toronto just need to have the real threat of losing their stars for nothing, and then we need their respective agents to arrange the appropriate S&T our way. It is a requirement that we have appealing assets at the right price- Lee & Nate can fit part of that bill.

Its not the end of the world if we have Nate & Lee signed past 2010, as long as their deals are reasonable.

I think the most realistic bet would be to do a S&T with Nate and Lee but they are not aways cut and dry. for example some random team offers Lee a big contract but they have nothing the Knicks want or are not willing to give Knicks a pick. Now they have basically turned the table on the Knicks and the Knicks fearing losing Lee for nothing make him an offer to match the other teams ridiculous offer. You are stuck with Lee and now you just hurt your 2010 plan same goes for Nate. Forget this years trades and all. Take another harsh year and get under the cap and then worry about adding players. Right now is not a good time to add players. As far as LeBron, Wade those guys aren't coming to NY they are just playing NY for a bigger pay day with their current teams.
LivingLegend
Posts: 26558
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 8/13/2007
Member: #1645
4/17/2009  11:30 AM
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

This may be the best we can hope for in a Nate sign and trade. Many teams will be wary of him based on the way he finished the season and will view him as a stats guy who is difficult to coach.

Not saying teams won't want him but teams will be wary of giving anything significant up for him while still having to sign him to long term deal.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
4/17/2009  2:40 PM
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

If you can't trade Nate by the trade deadline you are stuck with him and that hurts the 2010 plan. You are cutting it to close to 2010. Nate needs to be gone this off season same with Lee. You are already stuck with Jefferies and Curry no need to compound to those mistakes by adding Nate and Lee to the roster again. The goal is 2010 and the Knicks need to stick to the plan.

nah, if u can sign Nate up to a MLE there's no doubt in my mind u will be able to trade him at the deadline next year... the question is what will u get for him... but then again, Walsh has already painted himself into this corner... like i told u guys, the time to trade Lee & Nate was at the trade deadline this past season for picks... now we're pretty much at the mercy of those guys & their agents & at whatever team covets those guys... everyone knows the Knicks don't wanna be stuck w/those contracts longterm if they're putting both those guys on the trading block... Walsh better have a plan in place cuz if he doesn't get good value back for those guys it could set this franchise back a few years.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
4/17/2009  3:54 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

If you can't trade Nate by the trade deadline you are stuck with him and that hurts the 2010 plan. You are cutting it to close to 2010. Nate needs to be gone this off season same with Lee. You are already stuck with Jefferies and Curry no need to compound to those mistakes by adding Nate and Lee to the roster again. The goal is 2010 and the Knicks need to stick to the plan.

nah, if u can sign Nate up to a MLE there's no doubt in my mind u will be able to trade him at the deadline next year... the question is what will u get for him... but then again, Walsh has already painted himself into this corner... like i told u guys, the time to trade Lee & Nate was at the trade deadline this past season for picks... now we're pretty much at the mercy of those guys & their agents & at whatever team covets those guys... everyone knows the Knicks don't wanna be stuck w/those contracts longterm if they're putting both those guys on the trading block... Walsh better have a plan in place cuz if he doesn't get good value back for those guys it could set this franchise back a few years.


Nate is going to command more than the MLE and so is Lee, they had good seasons. Teams will pay for their services look for Nate to get somewhere close to 8 mill a year and look for Lee to get 9-10 mill. At that price I want nothing to do with those two players. To be honest the Knicks would be fools to match that kind of offer.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
4/17/2009  3:57 PM
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:

the only move i like in that plan is offering Nate to try & dump Fishlips' contract, but it's too late to do that now that Nate is a RFA & will likely be signed to a longterm contract this offseason... there aren't many matching big contracts out there that will match up w/both Jefferies & Nate's new contract extension... my guess is Nate will be traded for an expiring & a pick in the 2010 draft if Walsh can find a taker for him... otherwise he'll be showcased next season for a possible trade deadline trade.

If you can't trade Nate by the trade deadline you are stuck with him and that hurts the 2010 plan. You are cutting it to close to 2010. Nate needs to be gone this off season same with Lee. You are already stuck with Jefferies and Curry no need to compound to those mistakes by adding Nate and Lee to the roster again. The goal is 2010 and the Knicks need to stick to the plan.

nah, if u can sign Nate up to a MLE there's no doubt in my mind u will be able to trade him at the deadline next year... the question is what will u get for him... but then again, Walsh has already painted himself into this corner... like i told u guys, the time to trade Lee & Nate was at the trade deadline this past season for picks... now we're pretty much at the mercy of those guys & their agents & at whatever team covets those guys... everyone knows the Knicks don't wanna be stuck w/those contracts longterm if they're putting both those guys on the trading block... Walsh better have a plan in place cuz if he doesn't get good value back for those guys it could set this franchise back a few years.


Nate is going to command more than the MLE and so is Lee, they had good seasons. Teams will pay for their services look for Nate to get somewhere close to 8 mill a year and look for Lee to get 9-10 mill. At that price I want nothing to do with those two players. To be honest the Knicks would be fools to match that kind of offer.

what team is gonna offer Nate that much money tho? we don't have to match any offer that isn't made... i don't see him getting much more than a MLE offer from teams personally... Lee i can see getting at least $9 mil per from teams looking to shore up their frontcourt... that's gonna be a tough decision for Walsh to make.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274
4/17/2009  4:36 PM
What am I missing here???? Aren't there just a few teams under the salary cap in 2009 that can sign a FA??? If this is the case, wouldn't a sign and trade be the most likely outcome for a team who wants either N8 or Lee (and can afford them)?

Does anyone have a list of teams that are projecting to be under the salary cap in 2009?
« Reply To Topic
What I would do this offseason
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