Shandon Anderson and the #43 pick for Alan Henderson and the #35 pick.

We then buy out Henderson (last year of contract for 8 mill).

Why do we do this?

1) get rid of Shandon

2) open up roster spot

3) more likely to get a difference maker at #35 than #43

The above are clearly worth the 8 mill it would cost us...sheesh zeke would pay 8 mill just to accomplish the first reason, two and three are gravy.

Why does Atlanta do it?

1) Shandon is from Atlanta

2) Shandon is never injured (nba iron man)

3) He's a legit 7th or 8th man

4) They have 3 players on their roster. With 5 picks, they're gonna need some vets to steer the youth. Despite his shortcomings, Shandon is a perfectly legit 2 or 3 off the bench...especially on a rebuilding team

ATL won't give up an expiring deal for a marginal role player w/4 more years left on his deal...i don't care where Shandon is from.

You are right on one point...if Atlanta wants to build a team of young guys they should have a vet in there to help the process. I don't know if they add Shandon because of the lenght and $ of his contract. Finding a couple of vets that are willing to take 2-4 Million a year is probably a better idea for them.

the most realistic trade i can think of for Shandon is something like Shandon & a 2nd round pick for Abdul Wahad (why you would do this i have no idea), or Shandon, Mutombo & a 2nd round pick for Raef Lafrentz (an even worse contract than Shandon's)

i can't picture any team giving up any expiring deals or quality players w/reasonable contracts for Shandon.

How about S.Anderson, KT & Frank Williams for M.Rose & Turk(S&T for about 4mil). Spurs are under the cap. Rose has one yr longer than Anderson. Williams would be a excellent backup to Parker and they need a backup bad. KT can play both PF & Center and get away with it with Duncan by his side. It would be like trading Rose for Anderson & Frank Williams & moving KT for Turk. Knicks replace Anderson with Rose and add Turk who could come off the bench play 4 positions adding size and versatility.

TMS said " ATL won't give up an expiring deal for a marginal role player w/4 more years left on his deal...i don't care where Shandon is from."

Correction: Shandon has 3 years, NOT 4 left on his contract...that's a relevant distinction, it means they (or the Knicks) can trade him as a semi valuable ending contract in just 2 years.

Posted by Andrew:

realistic shandon anderson trade = oxymoron

couldn't have said it better myself. Stop wasting time trying to trade Anderson. Just let him rot on the IR until his contract is an expiring one in 2 1/2 years--that's the only time you can get something decent for him.

name one decision dolan has made where talent was even a top 3 factor

just one? how about putting Frank rather than Moochie (who has a bigger contract) on the playoff roster

Posted by Chico:

at first that example appears to be the exception that proves the rule... however anyone sensible could see Houston wasn't going to possibly play and we weren't going to get by NJ anyway, so Houston should clearly have been put on the IL and both Moochie and Frankie should've been activated. A nonplaying Houston was activated instead of Moochie. A walking Moochie has more talent than a non walking Houston, so the fact is, Dolan kept Houston activated to sell tickets to a sweep, rather than face facts, activate Moochie and give us a flying chance to win just one game. Those are facts, jack.

Hey, don't change the rules. You just said name one example. You didn't say irrelevant counter-examples needed to be discussed