for Kurt Hinrich and their first round draft pick? You would have to include about a ton of other guys to make it work under the salary cap, but what do you guys think?

C- Emeka or Josh
PF- Sweetney
SF- Tim Thomas (Although, one source says we would have to trade him in the deal, to make it work)
SG- Houston
PG- Hinrich with Frankie as the backup.

That's a really good lineup.

It's sooooo hard to get a really promising center these days, and Emeka is one of those few, bright exceptions. Plus, we get Hinrich in the package, and he's already doing a lot. Thoughts?

uhhh what? what?! WHAT!!!

1. No way CHI does this deal! They are saying Hinrich is an untouchable.
2. Houston and TT combined make 30million, Hinrich makes 3. These 'sources' are either messing with ya, or not telling you the whole story.

Any deal with CHI for one of their youngsters like Curry, Chandler etc would also mean taking back one or two bad salaries. JYD or AD for example.

The thing is this. Dolan approved of the Marbury trade, for the sole purpose of selling tickets, obviously. Would he allow this trade? I really don't know, but most other owners would consider it.

WE would be really big suckers in this one. We are taking on lousy contracts giving up good YOUNG players including a franchise point for a draft pick. I think the Bulls tried something like that with a guy named Elton Brand. though even they couldn't match the lunacy of this one.

[Edited by - nykshaknbake on 04/20/2004 01:32:38]

if anything i would take curry over chandler or maybe crawford and chandler. there is no way i would want all those bad contracts and have a guy with a bad back and a rookie hopeful. that is a big risk remember derrick coleman. amazing in college but trash in the nba. im not saying okafor will be trash but there is that risk factor. marbury is a proven star. i want either their center or 2 young stars with talent. you add in those 3 terrible contract and then its fair


[Edited by - armondaone on 04/20/2004 08:41:27]

this is a very bad trade for the knicks!
hey marb is 27.yo ,he is in his prime for next 3 years, so why make a trade for kirk and their no.1 pick who will never get to the level of marb's prime in the next few years.
the knicks must have marb if they want to be contender in the near future, we must find a way to get youth without letting mrab go.
we can give othela(final year),deke(final year),kurt(good contract),frank williams(if we have to)
we can give some of those guys for a team for a first rounder or a promesing young player(al harrington,jamal craford,chris wilcox and more...).

You're glad some of US (US!!?) aren't the GM?
What cogent point have you made here that would show what a good GM you would make?

You'd trade our one STAR, plus TT, plus Fwill and Sweets for a rookie and a draft pick, and you'd saddle us with unmovable contracts? What the hell is wrong with you? Do you know what we gave up to get Marbs?

In essence you want us to trade two #1 picks, Fwill, Sweets, Milos, Lampe, Dyesses and Ward's ending contracts for Hinrich,Chandler(bad back) and a pick? AND THREE AWFUL SALARIES????

Four #1 picks and Marbury-Tim Thomas for Hinrich-Chandler-#1 pick?

You're crazy!!! Who are you to say we'd be bad GMs? You'd move this team back three years. Now what is your response?

[Edited by - kam77 on 04/20/2004 11:33:15]

I'm one of those who'd much rather build with a franchise 5 or 4, than a franchise PG. Why are the West so dominant? Simple, they have the best bigmen! I would endorse ANY transaction IT makes that would land us Okafor - Including dealing Marbury.

I'd rather keep marbury.

i would trade marbury for the first pick in the drafin a mili-second