Knixkik wrote:Vets are needed for rebuilding teams. He's the ideal vet presence here. I would love to keep him. Continue to start him until we find a long-term SF, then transition him off the bench alongside McDermott and company. Obviously if you can trade him for good value, it has to be considered, but no need to deal him just for cap relief. He earns his money and is a very useful player. Right now i see our long-term lineup as this.

C Kanter
PF Porzingis
SF TBD
SG Hardaway
PG Ntilikina
6th Lee
7th McDermott
8th Backup PG
9th Hernangomez
10th Dotson

We need a high level starting SF and a high level backup PG. Everything else should be developed in house for now.

We need vets but not at big money that hinders our ability to do what rebuilding teams must do: (1) maintain cap flexibility to take advantage of the market if a game changing talent becomes available and (2)acquire short-term, unsavy contracts to buttress our cache of draft picks. The Knicks are in a position to do neither because of contracts like Courtney Lee, who helps keep us on the threadmill of mediocrity instead of developing youth and positioning ourselves for a better pick.

Bonn1997 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Paris907 wrote:

EnySpree wrote:I think Courtney lee is invaluable. I think we just need to hold on to him. Trading him for a draft pick seems like taking 2 steps back. One of the cogs that make us go. We have to be very careful not to disrupt chemistry. We are building a solid foundation not playing Jenga

Dotson is ready though. I dont think we can play that game unless we want to make a move on a player like Paul George in the off season

Your barely above 500, play 16 of 20 on the road in late Dec to early feb and your concern is Courtney Lee making us go. Sure, hold on to him until he’s worthless. Please. Briggs again is correct. He’s valuable to a playoff team and stockpiling picks and being relieved of $11 million works for me. I mean what’s your objective ? Make the first round and he eliminated and secure the 18th pick? Is that your definition of success? Play Dotson.

Exactly!

You have to also factor in that we'll be more appealing to FAs if we make the playoffs, though.

What free agents though. We don't have much wiggle room to clear meaningful cap space. And more importantly, Porzingis projects to be the only starter capable of starting on a championship team in the future. Pan over to the other Atlantic division teams (Celtics and Sixers) and they are fielding 4-5 players, when healthy, that can make that type of claim in the immediate future. The Knicks need gamechangers and the most appropriate means to do that in our current situation is through the draft. That needs to be our focus as well as developing the youth on the team.

Paris907 wrote:

EnySpree wrote:I think Courtney lee is invaluable. I think we just need to hold on to him. Trading him for a draft pick seems like taking 2 steps back. One of the cogs that make us go. We have to be very careful not to disrupt chemistry. We are building a solid foundation not playing Jenga

Dotson is ready though. I dont think we can play that game unless we want to make a move on a player like Paul George in the off season

Your barely above 500, play 16 of 20 on the road in late Dec to early feb and your concern is Courtney Lee making us go. Sure, hold on to him until he’s worthless. Please. Briggs again is correct. He’s valuable to a playoff team and stockpiling picks and being relieved of $11 million works for me. I mean what’s your objective ? Make the first round and he eliminated and secure the 18th pick? Is that your definition of success? Play Dotson.

There is certainly wisdom to turning stop gap players into future assets. There is also wisdom in providing enough continuity for your young players to develop winning habits and a winning NBA work ethic and supporting your coaching staff. Is what we are going to get in a trade for Courtney Lee enough to take a step back? If you think Doston is coming in playing as well as Lee you are wrong. I love Dotson. I think he's a legit prospect in the pipeline. Lee plays the right way. If have watched closely this year he's probably the key guy Jeff leans on to make adjustments. Losing Lee makes Jeff's job tougher. Is that enough to hold off on a trade? Well thats what Perry was hired for. Its not a simple yes no.

There will be plenty of changes coming up. I think everyone knows that. I think the best thing for everyone is the club playing good ball. Knicks need to maintain a positive outlook and record IMO first and foremost. Its been a bad couple games. I missed them both but they need to bounce back. IF the Knicks are competing and winning games in a couple months the Knicks will have tough decisions, but they will only be tough because guys like Lee, Kanter, KOQ and McD are going to have som value and Knicks will have some tough choices to make. For once the hope is those choices will be from a position of strength.

A deal that has come to mind is in the off season is Lee to the Pelicans for Asik's final yr and a 2nd round pick. Asik could be a stop gap thudder for a season if Kanter opts out and Perry decides not to pay.

The notion that Dotson isn't getting development because he isn't playing if false though. There are plenty of players who hardly played early on but still put in the work to develop their games and earned it. Jimmy Butler played 42 games 8.6 mins per game as a rookie. Even if Lee stayed for the remainder of his contract. Dotson would probably start beating him out for mins as he ages and Dotson gains experience. That's probably when Perry would feel its necessary to clear the way for Dotson.

Another option is if Dougie isn't retained and we draft a real SF pushing Lee to the bench. Dotson could take Dougies mins at backup SF with Lee at backup SG for the season.

NardDogNation wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Vets are needed for rebuilding teams. He's the ideal vet presence here. I would love to keep him. Continue to start him until we find a long-term SF, then transition him off the bench alongside McDermott and company. Obviously if you can trade him for good value, it has to be considered, but no need to deal him just for cap relief. He earns his money and is a very useful player. Right now i see our long-term lineup as this.

C Kanter
PF Porzingis
SF TBD
SG Hardaway
PG Ntilikina
6th Lee
7th McDermott
8th Backup PG
9th Hernangomez
10th Dotson

We need a high level starting SF and a high level backup PG. Everything else should be developed in house for now.

We need vets but not at big money that hinders our ability to do what rebuilding teams must do: (1) maintain cap flexibility to take advantage of the market if a game changing talent becomes available and (2)acquire short-term, unsavy contracts to buttress our cache of draft picks. The Knicks are in a position to do neither because of contracts like Courtney Lee, who helps keep us on the threadmill of mediocrity instead of developing youth and positioning ourselves for a better pick.

Positioning ourselves for a better pick is not always the answer. Winning is valuable for young teams. Losing is only productive if you are already eliminated from the playoff race and can position yourself for a very high pick. There is nothing wrong with being a middle of the road team if it's mainly with young up and coming players. Winning meaningful games is far more valuable for a young team than bumping up a couple of spots in the late lottery.

NYKBocker wrote:Right now...I am not looking to trade CLee. He has too much value in the rotation. The only way I trade him is for a 1st round draft pick.

Im ready to go full born rebuild--its either you are winning or your not. This team cannot win a championship or even close. I want to get to the Daymean Dotsons--because that type of player is the future and the future is now. Doesnt mean we cant rty to win--wed just be winning with younger players. Lee is a nice piece for a team winning now.

TripleThreat wrote:

ekstarks94 wrote:Lee will have 2 1/2 years left with no signs of slowing down...he can come off the bench or start and not lose any effectiveness...good lockeroom and team guy....I can see teams wanting that type of player....

The qualifications that you mention(Im paraphrasing for you so please correct me if I am wrong)......impact player on a short term deal or expiring....the players that fall into that slice of players are small at the very best....

Here's a list of expiring guards at the deadline or a little before that.

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/free-agents/2018/guard/

Contenders are usually cap locked or close to it. Could they use Lee? Sure depending on cost. For an injured guy or a bad contract, he's more valuable clearly. Is he more valuable than say a Joe Johnson for a 2nd round pick flip and the rights to a Euro stash player likely to never make the NBA?

I'm not saying all those dudes on that list can help nor that they will all be available, but any rational GM in the league, on a non Knicks team, has to consider the rate of return for the cost.

Non contenders would not want Lee for the same reasons that the Knicks would probably like to trade him now.

If your base argument is a team that really wants to push ( either to placate a core player hitting free agency or a GM on the hot seat desperate to save his job aka Otis Smith in Orlando near the end of Dwight Howards run of terror there...) then feel free to discuss teams where Lee is a good fit compared to the options available from the other 28 teams or a FA situation or soon to be fired GM where eating the back end of Lee's contract is a non concern over keeping his job another 2-3 months.

ekstarks94 wrote:The needs in the league are fluid today's need is not the same tomorrow..next week..next month. So telling you a specific team that needs him right now would not make sense since we are 1 1/2 into the season..all it takes is a hard deadline and teams make hard choices...

Also contention is in the eye of the beholder....certain teams are not adding pieces to make a run at a chip...they are trying to add firepower to match a conf rival...

Trust me, as a fan of the Knicks, I wish Briggs type imaginary trades were possible. But looking at the actual marketplace, it doesn't really shake out that way.

ekstarks94 wrote:Not saying that we are getting back real value on the onset...what I am saying is that it would not be a salary dump...could we get a first...dunno...maybe....but the landscape for a first does not exist for a player like Lee st this point into the season...can we get another teams bad signing or unwanted player if salaries are close...maybe...but again....teams are in any rush until the deadline which is before ASG this year....

There are many players on expiring deals...the majority of them are one way scorers...young players...old players...or simply unattainable...

The Knicks have tried to trade Lee pretty much since he walked in the door. He's still here. What does that say?

ekstarks4 wrote:I saw something a couple of moths ago that teams were calling us.....not sure what the offers are....

The same reason you'd like him to be moved is the same reasons why other teams won't want him for a positive asset ( a bad contract or an injured guy is a different story, but then why would the Knicks want that either?)

ekstarks94 wrote:I am not suggesting that we definitely move him ...unless we are wheels off....but something to be considered

BRIGGS wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:Right now...I am not looking to trade CLee. He has too much value in the rotation. The only way I trade him is for a 1st round draft pick.

Im ready to go full born rebuild--its either you are winning or your not. This team cannot win a championship or even close. I want to get to the Daymean Dotsons--because that type of player is the future and the future is now. Doesnt mean we cant rty to win--wed just be winning with younger players. Lee is a nice piece for a team winning now.

Exactly! +1

NardDogNation wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Vets are needed for rebuilding teams. He's the ideal vet presence here. I would love to keep him. Continue to start him until we find a long-term SF, then transition him off the bench alongside McDermott and company. Obviously if you can trade him for good value, it has to be considered, but no need to deal him just for cap relief. He earns his money and is a very useful player. Right now i see our long-term lineup as this.

C Kanter
PF Porzingis
SF TBD
SG Hardaway
PG Ntilikina
6th Lee
7th McDermott
8th Backup PG
9th Hernangomez
10th Dotson

We need a high level starting SF and a high level backup PG. Everything else should be developed in house for now.

We need vets but not at big money that hinders our ability to do what rebuilding teams must do: (1) maintain cap flexibility to take advantage of the market if a game changing talent becomes available and (2)acquire short-term, unsavy contracts to buttress our cache of draft picks. The Knicks are in a position to do neither because of contracts like Courtney Lee, who helps keep us on the threadmill of mediocrity instead of developing youth and positioning ourselves for a better pick.

Positioning ourselves for a better pick is not always the answer. Winning is valuable for young teams. Losing is only productive if you are already eliminated from the playoff race and can position yourself for a very high pick. There is nothing wrong with being a middle of the road team if it's mainly with young up and coming players. Winning meaningful games is far more valuable for a young team than bumping up a couple of spots in the late lottery.

Draft picks are the only thing that has consistently produced contenders. Even in the instance of teams trading for star/franchise players, the outgoing packages have almost always included players on their rookie contracts and future draft considerations. So what is the point in handicapping this process by devaluing our picks?

As I implied, you can build culture with veterans bound by more conservative, short-term contracts than what we currently have. That culture of winning means far more than the number of games actually won because the real value on the team will come from developing our youth until they themselves produce the wins we want. So long as progress toward that goal is being made, I don't see the issue with having a couple losing seasons along the way. Benching them to instead feature league re-threads, however, is not real "development" or the types of wins we should be seeking.

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Vets are needed for rebuilding teams. He's the ideal vet presence here. I would love to keep him. Continue to start him until we find a long-term SF, then transition him off the bench alongside McDermott and company. Obviously if you can trade him for good value, it has to be considered, but no need to deal him just for cap relief. He earns his money and is a very useful player. Right now i see our long-term lineup as this.

C Kanter
PF Porzingis
SF TBD
SG Hardaway
PG Ntilikina
6th Lee
7th McDermott
8th Backup PG
9th Hernangomez
10th Dotson

We need a high level starting SF and a high level backup PG. Everything else should be developed in house for now.

How do you define vets? KOQ, Kanter, and Thomas are in their 6th, 7th, and 7th seasons. I like having vets but I want them to be part of the long-term picture. I agree not to trade him just for cap relief though. I want a younger player and/or pick(s).

Question is why would anyone give you those?

Kanter has value but his contract makes him impossible to move. How many contenders have 20 million in dead weight, where we could leverage a 2nd round pick.
O'quinn is tradeable but the best your getting is a very late 2nd round pick or a stash euro that has a 10% chance of making it to the NBA as a rotation player

Jmpasq wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Vets are needed for rebuilding teams. He's the ideal vet presence here. I would love to keep him. Continue to start him until we find a long-term SF, then transition him off the bench alongside McDermott and company. Obviously if you can trade him for good value, it has to be considered, but no need to deal him just for cap relief. He earns his money and is a very useful player. Right now i see our long-term lineup as this.

C Kanter
PF Porzingis
SF TBD
SG Hardaway
PG Ntilikina
6th Lee
7th McDermott
8th Backup PG
9th Hernangomez
10th Dotson

We need a high level starting SF and a high level backup PG. Everything else should be developed in house for now.

How do you define vets? KOQ, Kanter, and Thomas are in their 6th, 7th, and 7th seasons. I like having vets but I want them to be part of the long-term picture. I agree not to trade him just for cap relief though. I want a younger player and/or pick(s).

Question is why would anyone give you those?

Kanter has value but his contract makes him impossible to move. How many contenders have 20 million in dead weight, where we could leverage a 2nd round pick.
O'quinn is tradeable but the best your getting is a very late 2nd round pick or a stash euro that has a 10% chance of making it to the NBA as a rotation player