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

Do you really think the Bulls will take Shandon?
Author Thread
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/11/2004  11:16 PM
I'm very skeptical of the rumors involving Shandon. I don't see why the Bulls would prefer him instead of Kurt.
AUTOADVERT
BigSm00th
Posts: 24504
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/9/2001
Member: #178
USA
7/11/2004  11:22 PM
The only two other suitors for Crawford were apparently either Indiana (Al Harrington) or Miami (Caron Butler+Eddie Jones).

Isiah might actually have the upper hand now, because both of those teams did deals involving the players they would've used to get Crawford.

Also, with the way the market went, Kurt came out very cheap, so Isiah can demand better players in exchange for Crawford. I think it's highly unlikely that Kurt gets traded.
#Knickstaps
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/11/2004  11:40 PM
If you owned the Bulls would you rather lose Jamal for nothing or take back Shandon's contract (in exchange for expiring contracts, Frank, and getting rid of JYD's and E-Rob's contracts)? If the 9 player deal goes down, I don't think the Bulls save any money in the long-term.
BigSm00th
Posts: 24504
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/9/2001
Member: #178
USA
7/11/2004  11:47 PM
I don't think the 9-player deal will go down. Mutumbo won't be traded, he said if he is, he'll retire, so count him out.

The Bulls don't want Norris, and the Knicks don't need Jeffries with the way Ariza is playing.

I think the best (and easiest) deal for both teams is Anderson, Frank Williams, Trybanski, and Harrington for Crawford and one of their big contracts. They replace their big contract with another big contract who won't bitch and moan, get a promising young PG, and expiring contracts. They won't get a better deal than that, and it's better than losing him for nothing.
#Knickstaps
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/12/2004  12:15 AM
If they want Mutombo only for his expiring contract, then I don't think it matters if he retires.

I think the best (and easiest) deal for both teams is Anderson, Frank Williams, Trybanski, and Harrington for Crawford and one of their big contracts.

If they do that deal w/ E-Rob included, the Bulls come out with a net loss of $15 mil over 3 years. They're trading $14 mil owed to E-Rob plus Crawf (who they owe nothing if they let walk) for $29 mil in players from the Knicks over 3 years.

If you replace E-Rob with JYD, they lose $11 mil over 3 years. I don't see a deal working out unless we take back BOTH E-Rob and JYD. And even then, I don't see it working with Shandon included. If the Bulls don't want Kurt and the Knicks can't find a third team, I don't think the deal will get done
BigSm00th
Posts: 24504
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/9/2001
Member: #178
USA
7/12/2004  12:33 AM
After Sweetney's performance in the SL showing he wouldn't be able to start this year, the Knicks wouldn't trade Thomas.

The Bulls, in my opinion, have to get rid of Crawford. They haven't even offered him a contract yet, all they've done is negotiate trades. They don't want him back, and Crawford wants to be a Knick. It'll happen.

I think most of the bad contracts here are cancelling each other out, and then the expiring contracts are equalling what Crawford's getting. So if they'd rather overpay for Shandon Anderson, a guy who won't complain and who will work hard, rather than overpaying for Eddie Robinson, a guy who complained about everything, made fun of the coach and organization, etc., and they get a young PG from Chicago and expiring contracts, that works out to a pretty good deal for them. At this point, I doubt Crawford would re-sign with them.

The sleeper could be Denver. Would they offer Crawford a big deal after possibly striking out with Kmart, Richardson, Manu, and Kobe? That's why I think the deal needs to go down on July 14th, end it the first day contracts can be signed, so nobody can swoop in and steal him (Phoenix could open up some space if QRich is matched, and Denver was mentioned previously)
#Knickstaps
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/12/2004  1:13 AM
The contacts do NOT simply cancel out; you can't just ignore that the Bulls have a net loss of over $10 mil if either trade goes down--it's a business! Check out the bulls realgm boards. Every Bulls fan hates both trades that have been proposed. Either all of these fans are smarter than the bulls management is or none of the rumored deals will go down.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 07/12/2004 01:13:20]
BigSm00th
Posts: 24504
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/9/2001
Member: #178
USA
7/12/2004  1:18 AM
If the deal is Shandon, Frank, Othella, and Cezary for a re-signed Crawford and JYD, Shandon and JYD cancel out the same year. He might get paid a little more, but they still expire the same year.

So it's basically Frank Williams and two expiring contracts for Jamal Crawford, who the Bulls don't want. They didn't want him last year, they don't want him now (no contract even offered). If he winds up back on the Bulls it'll be like Nomar going back to the Sox and nobody being happy.

As my friend Vaf said, if this deal doesn't go down, would it be that bad? With the way Ariza's playing, who doesn't want to get this guy minutes at the 3? Just move Penny to backup SG and it's not a bad team (permitting Houston doesn't get hurt.)
#Knickstaps
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
7/12/2004  1:54 AM
JYD can be a much more servicable player for us, as opposed to Anderson, b/c he is a nice backup, role playing, frontcourt player. He hustles and plays tough D'.

The way the NBA works, Crawford may not even become a Knick. That wouldn't be a bad thing, nescessarily. Frank and Penny can be very good players for us, with better roles, as opposed to Crawford, who just shoots and scores. Isn't that what we have Allan, Tim Thomas and even Marbury for? Not saying that getting Crawford is bad, but not getting him is not bad either. We need to be creative, grow some balls and find ways to improve our frontcourt. We have lots of talented players in the backcourt, even if Allan is hurt. We barely have any talent at all in our frontcourt, if you don't include Ariza and DerMarr. Time to fix that up. The backcourt shouldn't be the #1 priority, even if it's for the future.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
RonRon
Posts: 25531
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/22/2002
Member: #246
7/12/2004  3:09 AM
The way the NBA works, Crawford may not even become a Knick. That wouldn't be a bad thing, nescessarily. Frank and Penny can be very good players for us, with better roles, as opposed to Crawford, who just shoots and scores. Isn't that what we have Allan, Tim Thomas and even Marbury for? Not saying that getting Crawford is bad, but not getting him is not bad either. We need to be creative, grow some balls and find ways to improve our frontcourt. We have lots of talented players in the backcourt, even if Allan is hurt. We barely have any talent at all in our frontcourt, if you don't include Ariza and DerMarr. Time to fix that up. The backcourt shouldn't be the #1 priority, even if it's for the future.

i totally agree.... Yes, we had trouble handling the ball and couldnt get it in marbarys hands during the playoffs but is jamal crawford the only solution? We can hopefully get back a healthy houston and have our big 3 shoot most of the baskets. It would be great if we can add a post player, a shotblocker/rebounder. I dont think sweetney has developed to that post player we need yet but we certainly need to give him minutes this year to develop.

Kurt Thomas probably plays best for us when he plays center. Mainly because he shoots quite well and centers can defend out there. He also lacks the size and athleticism to defend most 4s or 5s.

I also like ariza and barreat. I would like to see a future with them in NY.

Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
7/12/2004  3:30 AM
I don't think you can count on Houston being healthy.

Why can't Sweetney start this year?
RonRon
Posts: 25531
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/22/2002
Member: #246
7/12/2004  5:06 AM
I think he can start a little later on during the season however, he wont be a dominating post force. Not unless there is a center like Dampier that can make things easier for him. With our roster of centers, my point is saying he will be a liability because of height and shotblocking ability.

I really like barreat. He looks like a mini earl boykins/travis best.

Trevor looks like he can develop into a gem. His basketball IQ, all round game and athleticsm reminds me of an agressive ginobili but without the shot. I like his game a lot already. He can develop to be good 2 or 3 depending on how his body develops within the next couple years.

Do you really think the Bulls will take Shandon?

©2001-2012 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