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

Eric Bledsoe wants out
Author Thread
EwingsGlass
Posts: 23035
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
10/24/2017  10:58 PM
You think Bledsoe wants out of Phoenix but in here? Seems unlikely.
AUTOADVERT
TLover
Posts: 20649
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/12/2003
Member: #381
USA
10/24/2017  11:01 PM
Markji wrote:Trades that work

Knicks receive : Bledsoe and either Warren or Josh Jackson (we can ask - Both play the same position = SF and Warren received an extension for 4 additional years. Our 2 needs are PG and SF.

Knicks give up : CLee; Willy; Frank; Kuz (Phoenix needs a back-up center = Willy and a replacement for Bledsoe at PG = Frank)

If we can get Josh Jackson, that would cost us in addition at least the Chicago 2nd round pick (probably a top 5 in 2nd round) or maybe a future first round of ours.
Getting Josh Jackson (#4 pick) would allow us to feel comfortable in trading Frank (#8 pick) and a pick and would round out our team.

If we can get Josh Jackson with Bledsoe then yes all day!

TripleThreat
Posts: 21525
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

10/25/2017  1:31 AM
TLover wrote:
Markji wrote:Trades that work

Knicks receive : Bledsoe and either Warren or Josh Jackson (we can ask - Both play the same position = SF and Warren received an extension for 4 additional years. Our 2 needs are PG and SF.

Knicks give up : CLee; Willy; Frank; Kuz (Phoenix needs a back-up center = Willy and a replacement for Bledsoe at PG = Frank)

If we can get Josh Jackson, that would cost us in addition at least the Chicago 2nd round pick (probably a top 5 in 2nd round) or maybe a future first round of ours.
Getting Josh Jackson (#4 pick) would allow us to feel comfortable in trading Frank (#8 pick) and a pick and would round out our team.

If we can get Josh Jackson with Bledsoe then yes all day!


The Suns wouldn't move Josh Jackson for Kyrie Irving, who is an All Star, has a ring, and is a Nike Signature athlete. They aren't going to move him for Tier 4 first round pick and a big, albeit a nice young one, don't carry the same potential at this point and time.

The Knicks are not getting Josh Jackson. The Knicks are not getting Josh Jackson. The Knicks are not getting Josh Jackson.

This doesn't pass the Mirror Test, not even close. The George and Melo trades do pass, if only because the risk was losing both players for nothing in the offseason. You can actually sell that concept to a fanbase, to the owner, to the sports media. Sending out Josh Jackson for a package that would not have gotten the Knicks the draft slot to even draft Jackson is completely indefensible.

Since you came on this board you have been way off in regards to trade value. - Briggs 7/28/2015
Paris907
Posts: 20765
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/4/2015
Member: #6099
USA
10/25/2017  5:26 AM
reub wrote:
Swishfm3 wrote:Why so much for Hernangomez when Kanter does the same exact thing?

This love reminds me of the outcry members had over Mozgov when he was traded. What kind of career is he having? Still working off of that "potential" label.

Yes to Hernangomez. I would be a little reluctant to give up Frank though...Not a fan of his but we did draft him so I would like to see what he can actually do before trading him and I think having Bledsoe in front of him in the depth chart would be a good thing for him.

Willy is younger and makes $1.5 million per year for 4 more years and has much more upside. His defense was actually above the league average last season (according to advanced stats) which provides hope for even more improvement. He's been groomed by the Gasol brothers in Spain for the past few years. Kanter makes $17 million per year and can walk after this season. Willy is a long term solution and Kanter is not.

Gee I didn’t know bringing sense to the comments was permitted. Kanter is the no brainer and if you bring Lee into the equation they gotta throw in more than Bledsoe to make the numbers work. They represent $28 mm on our books. Wily is a bargain and a keeper. Once we know if Noah can be a legit backup, then let Wily play and Noah can back him up. Oq home before trade deadline Too

Paris907
Posts: 20765
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/4/2015
Member: #6099
USA
10/25/2017  5:40 AM
TPercy wrote:
Markji wrote:Trades that work

Knicks receive : Bledsoe and either Warren or Josh Jackson (we can ask - Both play the same position = SF and Warren received an extension for 4 additional years. Our 2 needs are PG and SF.

Knicks give up : CLee; Willy; Frank; Kuz (Phoenix needs a back-up center = Willy and a replacement for Bledsoe at PG = Frank)

If we can get Josh Jackson, that would cost us in addition at least the Chicago 2nd round pick (probably a top 5 in 2nd round) or maybe a future first round of ours.
Getting Josh Jackson (#4 pick) would allow us to feel comfortable in trading Frank (#8 pick) and a pick and would round out our team.


Hard to say no to this trade
Bledsoe
Thjr
Jackson
KP
Kanter

Sessions
Dotson/Baker
Doug
Beasley
KOQ/Noah

Still a relatively young team with lots of upside. Plenty of scoring with this lineup. Then we could target a PG in the upcoming draft

Funny but when I make trades, the first q I ask myself if can this player take me to the finals ? That doesn’t mean he’s a star but even part of the rotation?

Of the players above there are only two maybe three players that could be around for that. KP and Jackson and possibly Dotson. My objective is tanking. I want Begley or Porter or Doncic. another center you ask? Yes because OQ will be gone, Noah will run out of his contract, Kanter is a unrestricted free agent who cannot takenuountonthe promised land with his defense and Wily would be gone in your equation. Guards? Sure. We need guards. But let’s find out if Frank is a real guard or not. In the meantime plug in Porter or Begley above and suddenly you’ve Porter/Begley, KP Jackson
And THJr and Eric. But I don’t see either EB or THJr as players who will take us where we wanna go.
The latter maybe 6th man if he plays Defense he and the former arthritic by then if not sooner.

They would do okay but we would have to address a true PG in Free agenxy or the Draft in 2019-20.

Paris907
Posts: 20765
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/4/2015
Member: #6099
USA
10/25/2017  5:46 AM
Markji wrote:
reub wrote:
TPercy wrote:
Markji wrote:Trades that work

Knicks receive : Bledsoe and either Warren or Josh Jackson (we can ask - Both play the same position = SF and Warren received an extension for 4 additional years. Our 2 needs are PG and SF.

Knicks give up : CLee; Willy; Frank; Kuz (Phoenix needs a back-up center = Willy and a replacement for Bledsoe at PG = Frank)

If we can get Josh Jackson, that would cost us in addition at least the Chicago 2nd round pick (probably a top 5 in 2nd round) or maybe a future first round of ours.
Getting Josh Jackson (#4 pick) would allow us to feel comfortable in trading Frank (#8 pick) and a pick and would round out our team.


Hard to say no to this trade
Bledsoe
Thjr
Jackson
KP
Kanter

Sessions
Dotson/Baker
Doug
Beasley
KOQ/Noah

Still a relatively young team with lots of upside. Plenty of scoring with this lineup. Then we could target a PG in the upcoming draft

reub wrote:
-We're two games into a real rebuild and I have to hear this? Yes, We need a PG badly.

-Let's stick with our draft picks and youth, If we can get Josh Jackson back, that is youth. Warren is also young (24 yrs old)

-trade some veterans - CLee is a vet and 2nd oldest player on the team + has 3 yrs on his contract

-and develop a core. We'd be giving up 2 young players and receive 1 young player with more potential than either of the 2 we give up.

-We're on the right track and don't need players with injuries on the downside of their careers.

We can dream about building from draft picks but that is very uncertain. Bledsoe is much more certain for the next 2 years and makes us relevant. KP will love playing with him and KP will grow so much faster and be much more satisfied. He doesn't want to tank. No professional athletic wants to tank. If you have played many sports you'll know that it gives a player great satisfaction to play hard and win.

If being relevant is your objective, then by all means give up your youth. If you want to battle Boston and Phili for dominance in the EAST,
Bledsoe ain’t an answer.

Paris907
Posts: 20765
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/4/2015
Member: #6099
USA
10/25/2017  5:53 AM
franco12 wrote:I'm kinda ok trading both Frank & Willy. Frank might be a bust, and Willy doesn't play defense, and we have Kanter.

Kanter, KP & KOQ
THjr & Bledsoe - that is a potential 40 win team in the east, and I would go for it.

To make salaries match, though, I insist Phoenix takes Noah

So your objective is being a 40 win team in the East?

Jmpasq
Posts: 22800
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/10/2012
Member: #4182

10/25/2017  8:11 AM    LAST EDITED: 10/25/2017  8:12 AM
BigDaddyG wrote:Assuming Bledsoe did become a Knick, I could see his game complementing Frank's I'm the backcourt. But what would that do to THjr. He could play spot minutes at the three, but that's not long-term solution for a winning franchise. Wouldn't a Bledsoe trade cause the same problems we have at the center spot?

Frank is years away from being a starter by then Bledsoe could be gone or a 6th man. Plus Hardaway isnt that good.

Check out My NFL Draft Prospect Videos at Youtube User Pages Jmpasq,JPdraftjedi,Jmpasqdraftjedi. www.Draftbreakdown.com
Jmpasq
Posts: 22800
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/10/2012
Member: #4182

10/25/2017  8:16 AM
jskinny35 wrote:My cousin lives in Phx and I see a few games a year - Bledsoe would be great on a team like the Cavs. On the Knicks - even if he holds up physically - he dominates the ball and doesn't seem to have great passing instincts. While we need better PG play, I think we should take our lumps and let KP develop. Really think Bledsoe would take away from KP establishing himself as the team leader this season. Understand the concern about KP wanting to win soon before contract expires - but we can't skip this year's growing pains. If we could get involved in a 3 way deal - would focus on trying to pry TJ Warren for any of the following (Kanter, C.Lee, O'Quinn, Kuz). Kanter is playing well but is fools gold... poor defense, slow and not a good fit next to KP. Would rather take our chance with Willy, even though his defense is not great either...

I like Bledsoe and wouldn't be opposed to trading for him but the ball movement is already a problem with KP, Kanter, and Hardaway.
Check out My NFL Draft Prospect Videos at Youtube User Pages Jmpasq,JPdraftjedi,Jmpasqdraftjedi. www.Draftbreakdown.com
Bonn1997
Posts: 58320
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/25/2017  10:36 AM
knicks1248 wrote:Like the knicks with melo, the Suns loss their leverage with Bledsoe because he doesn't want to be there, and as of now they don't want him.

That's not their only problem, he's injury prone, and the pg position is pretty solidify on almost every team in the NBA except the KNICKs, Bucks, and Clippers, and the buck and clippers is far better than usalso, considering that the recent draft was PG heavy, you'll be hard press(like the knicks) to get a team to give up on a kid they just drafted. So far, none of these pg's look like a bust.

so what they will get (IF THIER LUCKY) is a decent vet role player and a future 1st rnd draft pick, which I would be more than happy to give them, ill even throw in willy, who can still resign with the knicks after next season

Bledsoe just isn't that good though. He's OK. Maybe this pushes us from 23 to 27 wins. I'd rather keep the long-term prospect.

fishmike
Posts: 47712
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
10/25/2017  2:03 PM
Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.
fishmike - Making UltimateKnicks great again
Bonn1997
Posts: 58320
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/25/2017  2:27 PM    LAST EDITED: 10/25/2017  2:28 PM
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Markji
Posts: 22719
Alba Posts: -4
Joined: 9/14/2007
Member: #1673
USA
10/25/2017  3:45 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.


Guys, just to set the record straight, Bledsoe is 'only' making $14.5 mil this season and $15 mil next season; not $16 mil.
I am for trading for Bledsoe if we can do it with our vets. Probably need another team as I believe Phoenix wants to re-build with youth.
The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense. Tom Clancy - author
Bonn1997
Posts: 58320
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/25/2017  3:49 PM
Markji wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.


Guys, just to set the record straight, Bledsoe is 'only' making $14.5 mil this season and $15 mil next season; not $16 mil.
I am for trading for Bledsoe if we can do it with our vets. Probably need another team as I believe Phoenix wants to re-build with youth.

OK - I probably just saw that someone else said 16 mil and repeated that number.
fishmike
Posts: 47712
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
10/25/2017  4:04 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Lowry is a better player now than he was when Tor traded for him. Thats the point. He's 50/40/80 NOW. He was 43/37/80 THEN.

You look for buy low opportunities. If you want Lowery NOW you pay the NOW price. We are looking for discounts and players that can improve. Bledsoe brings a lot to the table including a willingness to defend and he's light years better than any other PG on the club, has a cost friendly contract and Im only offering a player who is stunting the growth of the #2 prospect on our team right now. Tell me again why this would be a bad trade?

fishmike - Making UltimateKnicks great again
Bonn1997
Posts: 58320
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/25/2017  4:18 PM
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Lowry is a better player now than he was when Tor traded for him. Thats the point. He's 50/40/80 NOW. He was 43/37/80 THEN.

You look for buy low opportunities. If you want Lowery NOW you pay the NOW price. We are looking for discounts and players that can improve. Bledsoe brings a lot to the table including a willingness to defend and he's light years better than any other PG on the club, has a cost friendly contract and Im only offering a player who is stunting the growth of the #2 prospect on our team right now. Tell me again why this would be a bad trade?


Those are fair points. I'm not opposed to adding Bledsoe and maybe it would be worth it for KOQ. That's the most I'd consider giving up.
fishmike
Posts: 47712
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
10/25/2017  4:33 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Lowry is a better player now than he was when Tor traded for him. Thats the point. He's 50/40/80 NOW. He was 43/37/80 THEN.

You look for buy low opportunities. If you want Lowery NOW you pay the NOW price. We are looking for discounts and players that can improve. Bledsoe brings a lot to the table including a willingness to defend and he's light years better than any other PG on the club, has a cost friendly contract and Im only offering a player who is stunting the growth of the #2 prospect on our team right now. Tell me again why this would be a bad trade?


Those are fair points. I'm not opposed to adding Bledsoe and maybe it would be worth it for KOQ. That's the most I'd consider giving up.
KOQ doesnt match... however Kanter does. Perfectly. Would you do that? Thats the deal I am suggesting. 10000% NOOOO to any of the young guys on rookie (or Willy) deal. But Bledsoe for Kanter? I think thats a good deal for both teams. If I am Pho I would consider resigning him also. Even with Tyson. I would include the Bulls pick also if they strong arm me. Take it or leave it.
fishmike - Making UltimateKnicks great again
Knickoftime
Posts: 23205
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370

10/25/2017  4:34 PM
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Lowry is a better player now than he was when Tor traded for him. Thats the point. He's 50/40/80 NOW. He was 43/37/80 THEN.

You look for buy low opportunities. If you want Lowery NOW you pay the NOW price. We are looking for discounts and players that can improve. Bledsoe brings a lot to the table including a willingness to defend and he's light years better than any other PG on the club, has a cost friendly contract and Im only offering a player who is stunting the growth of the #2 prospect on our team right now. Tell me again why this would be a bad trade?

Sounds more like an unlikely trade. Is there an argument for Phoenix wanting Kantner?

fishmike
Posts: 47712
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
10/25/2017  4:45 PM
Knickoftime wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Lowry is a better player now than he was when Tor traded for him. Thats the point. He's 50/40/80 NOW. He was 43/37/80 THEN.

You look for buy low opportunities. If you want Lowery NOW you pay the NOW price. We are looking for discounts and players that can improve. Bledsoe brings a lot to the table including a willingness to defend and he's light years better than any other PG on the club, has a cost friendly contract and Im only offering a player who is stunting the growth of the #2 prospect on our team right now. Tell me again why this would be a bad trade?

Sounds more like an unlikely trade. Is there an argument for Phoenix wanting Kantner?

Look at their roster. Kanter is an offensive beast. I would keep him if we didnt 8 centers. I think a 4/5 rotation of KP/Willy/Kanter is very good and I would resign him. However with Noah and KOQ, Kanter is more expendable IF he helped me get better. Bledsoe certainly does that.
If I am Pho I think Booker/Knight/Jackson/Chris/Kanter + high pick this year is moving forward. I like that better than something packaged around Mudiay who I think is crap. We will see, but I think Kanter is among their best options. They are not exactly dealing from a position of strength.

Bledsoe makes the Knicks better and I like that deal for us, and I think getting Kanter back is good for them. I see this as a pretty fair swap.

fishmike - Making UltimateKnicks great again
TripleThreat
Posts: 21525
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

10/25/2017  4:46 PM
fishmike wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
fishmike wrote:Bledsoe is very good. He's only one guy but he's a difference maker on both sides. There are a lot of similarities to Bledsoe and Kyle Lowry. Bledsoe is a year older than Lowry the year he went to Toronto.
With this year and next at $16mm a year he would be a good fit if its the right deal. To me that means Kanter. No to Frank or Willy.

Lowry's an ultra efficient scorer (50/40/80% from 2, 3, and FT last year) with good passing skills. He helps his team win games. He's a legit all-star. Bledsoe isn't any of those things. I don't mind Bledsoe at 16 mil. It's an adequate deal. If we don't have to give up anything of long-term value, I'm OK with a trade but I doubt Phoenix would be. I'd rather get a late 1st round pick for KOQ than have KOQ as part of a Bledsoe trade though. We'd have to be giving up nothing of value for me to be OK with the trade and Phoenix wouldn't be then.

Lowry is a better player now than he was when Tor traded for him. Thats the point. He's 50/40/80 NOW. He was 43/37/80 THEN.

You look for buy low opportunities. If you want Lowery NOW you pay the NOW price. We are looking for discounts and players that can improve. Bledsoe brings a lot to the table including a willingness to defend and he's light years better than any other PG on the club, has a cost friendly contract and Im only offering a player who is stunting the growth of the #2 prospect on our team right now. Tell me again why this would be a bad trade?

If you are saying Kanter for Bledsoe with some filler to make it all match, that's a fantastic trade for the Knicks, except it's a horrible trade for the Suns. The Suns already have one of the worst defenses in the league, tripling down on a pivot who will opt in next and choke their cap doesn't seem like a good move, short term or long term.

No one wants Kanter unless its for an injured player or a dead contract. The Suns would be happy to take Kanter for Brandon Knight ( whom they are likely to stretch anyway, plus a small asset or two. But not Bledsoe.

Lee and a future first round pick might get it done, but the Suns would want limited protections on it. They'd also ask for Dotson.

Since you came on this board you have been way off in regards to trade value. - Briggs 7/28/2015
Eric Bledsoe wants out

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.com 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.