Knixkik wrote:

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

These last 3 games should make it clear Kanter isn't 20 mil of dead weight. He is critical to the success of this team both for his basketball ability and emotional leadership. He's what we wanted Noah to be from that standpoint. Hopefully we resign him.

I think he was selling what contender had 20 mil on dead weight they would be willing to part with along with picks in a trade for Kanter. The premise being we should be actively looking to trade assets for picks

meloshouldgo wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

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

These last 3 games should make it clear Kanter isn't 20 mil of dead weight. He is critical to the success of this team both for his basketball ability and emotional leadership. He's what we wanted Noah to be from that standpoint. Hopefully we resign him.

I think he was selling what contender had 20 mil on dead weight they would be willing to part with along with picks in a trade for Kanter. The premise being we should be actively looking to trade assets for picks

You're right. Thanks for clarifying.

We should definitely auction off our assets that aren't part of our future. I don't see how this is an actual question. We have guys that can help other teams and we also need to free up minutes. I'd rather McBuckets get minutes at SF than Lance. I'd rather Willy get minutes than KOQ. I'd rather get a first rounder for Lee (who has been my favorite player this year)

SupremeCommander wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

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.

Yep and the problem is we are on a time table here, once KP maxes out with a 35 million dollar a year deal, how the hell are we building a contender? We are already capped out with role players the only way to improve this team is through the draft. I'm sorry but 20 wins and a top 5 pick is more valuable than 35 wins and the 12th

What irks me most about this situation is how other people don't understand or see the pattern here. What we are doing is the same **** we've ALWAYS done: foresake the future for an empty, crippling present. This team is already stalling and likely to fall under .500 in the coming games.

How is that formula any different from the 2013-2014 when all we had were crippling contracts attached to one dimensional players who started out 14-14 and then fell completely off the map? We had no draft picks to capitalize on, why? Because we traded all of them to feature Carmelo Anthony with CBA-caliber talent and somehow expected us to be better than a one and done team as a best case scenario. No picks, no cap space equaled a wasted Melo prime.

How is this formula any different than the Stephon Marbury era? The Allan Houston era? THE PATRICM EWING era?

We've been an eye-sore for nearly 20 years, yet refused to embrace a true rebuild. How about we do things right for a change, bare the necessary growing pains, so that we can feature a team with enough youth to be like the Boston Celtics and Phildelphia Sixers? If we expect to compete with these emerging juggernauts, we damn well better come to grips with reality of our circumstances and try our best to get at least one more runningmate for Kristaps in the draft.

I could not agree any more than I do with this statement. As i said in the game thread last night, I've seen this movie before. This team absolutely blows on the road and we have a lot of road games coming up. The honest truth is once we start stringing brutal losses together, we won't get as much for our assets as we would right now

A legit starting PG, and this team could go to the ECF, health permitted. That is if a deal is made sooner rather than later. We saw how well this team played during the win streak with a serviceable PG. We dont do as well without Kanter? Kanter is a big part of the team's success. No surprise here.

This team is loaded, just needs a real floor general who knows when its time to chip in, and has the skills to do it. Be it scoring, getting to the line, rebounds. We dont really have that right now, and teams are figuring that out.

We aren't as far off from being at least a playoff team, then some here believe IMO. Better PG (even just above average) will make a big difference, pretty sure of that with all the talent on this squad.

Bears repeating that the Knicks drafted a couple of seasons in a row, below where they should have. Its lotto.

TripleThreat wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:A legit starting PG, and this team could go to the ECF, health permitted.....

This team is loaded...

We aren't as far off from being at least a playoff team, then some here believe IMO. Better PG (even just above average) will make a big difference, pretty sure of that with all the talent on this squad.

A) The East was already weak, and then gutted again this past offseason.

B) The Knicks played a ton of games at home

C) The Knicks have a bunch of guys without true long term value, but are playing to either stay in the NBA or get a new contract.

This is not, barring more injuries to Eastern teams, we are talking a crap ton of injuries, a playoff team.

This is however a team showing it can show spurts of real competitive play with basic team basketball (something the Melo ball lickers could never register in their heads...)

I challenge anyone here who thinks the Knicks can get a late first round pick for Courtney Lee that actually passes The Mirror Test to offer up some scenarios that would pass the NBA Trade Machine. Where the return is not a bad contract or a injured player. Where the trade actually makes short term AND long term sense for the non Knicks team.

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

"Ball Lickers"? Dont believe anyone here fell into that category, any more than Phil (as exec) fans. But thanks for ruining lunch!

Yes, home cooking has helped. So has playing the right way. I believe an upgrade at PG would help in that dept. We've played well against some good teams.

Im not concerned with long term value when it comes to this season. Long term goals should focus on giving KP, Frank, etc. playoff experience, in the near term, as long as they dont go for a quick fix.

There is a learning curve to the regular season, and there is a learning curve to the playoffs as well. The sooner they get through it, the better. So if Perry manages to put together a contender, KP and company should be ready to make the most of it, sooner rather than later.

TripleThreat wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Im not concerned with long term value when it comes to this season.

Every other team in the league, when it comes to Courtney Lee, has to assess long term value.

He's got two more years on his contract after this one. He's playing hard now and doing well, but part of the evaluation is to try to forecast what the next two years will bring.

He's a solid player. He's one of the rare players who can play within himself, he knows his limitations. There are far more talented dudes who do not have an NBA career because they could not do just that.

But the reality is the Knicks gave a guy worth a 2 year deal a contract that lasted four years. And the struggle to trade him now is the fallout. Poor market decisions compound. It's how the system tends to work. Knicks could have offered Lin a contract before telling him to go get an offer they could decide to match or not. They didn't. He walked for no compensation. I recognize some people here have an axe to grind against Lin, but the reality is, letting a positive asset (i.e. someone who is a non toxic player) walk for nothing is rarely the correct decision. So the Knicks got Felton. Converted to Calderon. Converted with Grant for Rose. At every point, the cost structure increased in terms of long term damage to the team's asset base.

Poor market based decisions are force multipliers. The negative effect happens again and again, worse and worse.

If the Knicks had held strong with Lee ( take a two year deal with a lesser AAV, otherwise we are not interested), maybe they would not be in this position in the first place.

No team will take on Lee in a trade, for a positive asset, if the VORP equation means they can spend way less and try to get 60-70 percent of what Lee gives you at a fraction of the cost and without the extra two years of commitment.

TripleThreat wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Im not concerned with long term value when it comes to this season.

Every other team in the league, when it comes to Courtney Lee, has to assess long term value.

He's got two more years on his contract after this one. He's playing hard now and doing well, but part of the evaluation is to try to forecast what the next two years will bring.

He's a solid player. He's one of the rare players who can play within himself, he knows his limitations. There are far more talented dudes who do not have an NBA career because they could not do just that.

But the reality is the Knicks gave a guy worth a 2 year deal a contract that lasted four years. And the struggle to trade him now is the fallout. Poor market decisions compound. It's how the system tends to work. Knicks could have offered Lin a contract before telling him to go get an offer they could decide to match or not. They didn't. He walked for no compensation. I recognize some people here have an axe to grind against Lin, but the reality is, letting a positive asset (i.e. someone who is a non toxic player) walk for nothing is rarely the correct decision. So the Knicks got Felton. Converted to Calderon. Converted with Grant for Rose. At every point, the cost structure increased in terms of long term damage to the team's asset base.

Poor market based decisions are force multipliers. The negative effect happens again and again, worse and worse.

If the Knicks had held strong with Lee ( take a two year deal with a lesser AAV, otherwise we are not interested), maybe they would not be in this position in the first place.

No team will take on Lee in a trade, for a positive asset, if the VORP equation means they can spend way less and try to get 60-70 percent of what Lee gives you at a fraction of the cost and without the extra two years of commitment.

Would be great if you didn't remove the part of my post that put that very brief exerpt, in its proper context. Not the first time.

It had nothing to do with Lee's contract, nothing to do with just giving away assets. It had everything to do with giving players like KP playoff experience sooner rather than later without a quick fix. Thats just as important in the long term as managing salaries IMO.

Not worried about long term value of players on this roster this season, especially Lee, since he wont get a long term deal from the Knicks after this one.

Wasn't an appeal to throwing caution to the wind, and making bad trades. It was an appeal not to forget that its more than just about building a team, cap considerations, its also about building experience.

Wrote on the first page that it would be tough to get a decent draft pick for a 33 year old vet. Would like to see if we could find a good veteran PG who by any standard would be considered an upgrade over Jack and Sessions, without a quick fix. No long term cap killing deals.

SupremeCommander wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

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.

Yep and the problem is we are on a time table here, once KP maxes out with a 35 million dollar a year deal, how the hell are we building a contender? We are already capped out with role players the only way to improve this team is through the draft. I'm sorry but 20 wins and a top 5 pick is more valuable than 35 wins and the 12th

What irks me most about this situation is how other people don't understand or see the pattern here. What we are doing is the same **** we've ALWAYS done: foresake the future for an empty, crippling present. This team is already stalling and likely to fall under .500 in the coming games.

How is that formula any different from the 2013-2014 when all we had were crippling contracts attached to one dimensional players who started out 14-14 and then fell completely off the map? We had no draft picks to capitalize on, why? Because we traded all of them to feature Carmelo Anthony with CBA-caliber talent and somehow expected us to be better than a one and done team as a best case scenario. No picks, no cap space equaled a wasted Melo prime.

How is this formula any different than the Stephon Marbury era? The Allan Houston era? THE PATRICM EWING era?

We've been an eye-sore for nearly 20 years, yet refused to embrace a true rebuild. How about we do things right for a change, bare the necessary growing pains, so that we can feature a team with enough youth to be like the Boston Celtics and Phildelphia Sixers? If we expect to compete with these emerging juggernauts, we damn well better come to grips with reality of our circumstances and try our best to get at least one more runningmate for Kristaps in the draft.

I could not agree any more than I do with this statement. As i said in the game thread last night, I've seen this movie before. This team absolutely blows on the road and we have a lot of road games coming up. The honest truth is once we start stringing brutal losses together, we won't get as much for our assets as we would right now

And the thing is that now would be the perfect time to unload our pricer veterans. With the season so fresh and teams tightly packed in the standings, I know many GMs with middling teams would roll the dice and attempt to solidify their playoff position or make a play for a playoff berth. The longer the season carries on and the more seperation is made in the standings, the weaker our position will become.

newyorknewyork wrote:Teams that would be interested in Lee will be teams trying to make the playoffs or team looking for an upgrade that can push them to the CF or F.

Teams like
Celtics, Hornets, Cavs, Nuggets, Pistons, Warriors, Rockets, Pacers, Clippers, Lakers, Grizzlies, Heat,
Bucks, Wolves, Pelicans, Thunder, Magic, 76ers, Blazers, Kings, Spurs, Raptors, Jazz, Wizards.

Out of these teams who needs upgrades or depth at SG
Celtics, Pistons, Clippers, Lakers, Pelicans, Spurs, Jazz

Out of these teams who has pieces that make sense for both sides and salaries match.

Next year imo Lee will be easier to trade as he will have 2 yrs left and the Knicks may be willing to take a lesser player who has an expiring while that team may be willing to take on the extra yr for the upgrade. Don't think a team would give up an expiring for 2 more years but would for 1 and probably a 2nd rounder. To much analytical data out there now. The game has changed front offices don't move like they did in the past. If not we may have to look at Lee as a backup SG to Hardaway and we can slide over Dotson to backup SF to get mins.

A move Perry may be able to pull off if he decided to go another direction would be a package of Lee & Kanter to Dallas for Matthews, Mcroberts, Harris and a future pick. If Cuban would rather try for a playoff push over tanking this coming season he may be interested in that deal. Knicks would clean up their cap and add a pick.

Not sure why you want to move Kanter, after he has shown what this squad is like without him. How many quality centers are we going to move? Sounds like Kanter really wants to stay in NY. Would rather see what it would take to keep him in NY before possibly trading him.

Get the feeling there are some backup PGs out there who would be an upgrade from Jack. Lee as part of a deal could get us there. Agree on that.

newyorknewyork wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Teams that would be interested in Lee will be teams trying to make the playoffs or team looking for an upgrade that can push them to the CF or F.

Teams like
Celtics, Hornets, Cavs, Nuggets, Pistons, Warriors, Rockets, Pacers, Clippers, Lakers, Grizzlies, Heat,
Bucks, Wolves, Pelicans, Thunder, Magic, 76ers, Blazers, Kings, Spurs, Raptors, Jazz, Wizards.

Out of these teams who needs upgrades or depth at SG
Celtics, Pistons, Clippers, Lakers, Pelicans, Spurs, Jazz

Out of these teams who has pieces that make sense for both sides and salaries match.

Next year imo Lee will be easier to trade as he will have 2 yrs left and the Knicks may be willing to take a lesser player who has an expiring while that team may be willing to take on the extra yr for the upgrade. Don't think a team would give up an expiring for 2 more years but would for 1 and probably a 2nd rounder. To much analytical data out there now. The game has changed front offices don't move like they did in the past. If not we may have to look at Lee as a backup SG to Hardaway and we can slide over Dotson to backup SF to get mins.

A move Perry may be able to pull off if he decided to go another direction would be a package of Lee & Kanter to Dallas for Matthews, Mcroberts, Harris and a future pick. If Cuban would rather try for a playoff push over tanking this coming season he may be interested in that deal. Knicks would clean up their cap and add a pick.

Not sure why you want to move Kanter, after he has shown what this squad is like without him. How many quality centers are we going to move? Sounds like Kanter really wants to stay in NY. Would rather see what it would take to keep him in NY before possibly trading him.

Get the feeling there are some backup PGs out there who would be an upgrade from Jack. Lee as part of a deal could get us there. Agree on that.

I doubt the deal actually happens. Only spitting out possible options. I have no problem keeping Kanter.

Got it. Kanter is 25 and playing at a high level, and loves NY. We need a good starting PG like you know what, but I dont want to see a repeat of the Rose trade, robbing Peter to pay Paul. Just surprised some posters (not you) want to break up another great tandem. I would have no problem with Kanter getting Ryan Anderson money. Perry would have to work around it. Been a long time since I thought anyone in the NY front office could.