# Vince Rumor



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

got this off RealGm Knicks page today


"Vince Carter in NY?
We're getting reports from Seattle that a three-way is currently being looked into that would send Toronto Superstar Vince Carter to the Knicks, Ray Allen to the Raptors, and Kurt Thomas to the Sonics. My natural guess is other players will be involved as well.
Another 3 way is being discussed between the Lakers, Mavs, and Raptors sending Carter to the Lakers, Shaq to the Mavs, and quite a bit of compensation and relief to Toronto. My opinion is Toronto may not be needed as there are plenty of other teams with superstars looking to be moved such as the Sonics themselves and Philadelphia."

also, what about a larger bulls deal involving a sign and trade for Crawford like this:

Chicago trades: SG Jamal Crawford	(17.3 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 35.1 minutes) 
_	PF Tyson Chandler	(6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 22.4 minutes) 
Chicago receives: C Kurt Thomas	(11.1 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 1.9 apg in 31.9 minutes) 
_	PF Mike Sweetney	(4.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 0.3 apg in 11.8 minutes) 
_	PG Frank Williams	(3.9 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 2.2 apg in 12.8 minutes) 
Change in team outlook: -4.1 ppg, +1.8 rpg, and -1.4 apg.
New York trades: C Kurt Thomas	(11.1 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 1.9 apg in 31.9 minutes) 
_	PF Mike Sweetney	(4.3 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 0.3 apg in 11.8 minutes) 
_	PG Frank Williams	(3.9 ppg, 1.0 rpg, 2.2 apg in 12.8 minutes) 
New York receives: SG Jamal Crawford	(17.3 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.1 apg in 80 games) 
_	PF Tyson Chandler	(6.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 0.7 apg in 35 games) 
Change in team outlook: +4.1 ppg, -1.8 rpg, and +1.4 apg.

can you sign and trade and add other players or would the chandler part have to be a separate deal?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Wow Vince and Kobe, Vince and Starbury cut the checks the league is about to be taken over


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*yah*

Nah that idiot Babcock wants to keep Vince because of Iversonian motives...if Vince came to NY though that'd be great, but we still wouldn't win anything.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

why would seattle give up Ray Allen just to get Kurt Thomas? doesnt make much sense.

and i wouldnt do that Chicago trade. i dont like Chandler, and we would be trading our two best frontcourt guys, our great backup point guard for that stiff and Jamal. We would have nothing in our frontcourt. Unless you think Nazr is good, and i dont.


----------



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

i don't think Nazr is good but I do still retain hope that Chandler, with proper guidance, can be very good and, if we're going to get Crawford through trade rather than MLE then Chicago is going to want Fwill either to keep or to trade elsewhere, and it makes sense, bc JC is a combo guard, Penny can play SG and we can't get rid of Moochie's contract (would that we could) so that, if we got JC and kept Fwill we'd have 6 PG/SG; i did the trade bc i think Chicago would go for it but we're not taken to the cleaners--i love Sweets but CHandler has shown at least as much in the league (tho yes, he's also shown worse attitude and more injury-proneness) and he's a legit 7 footer. I don't believe FWill will ever be any better or even as good as Jamal, so I'm willing to roll dice on this. Of course, I'd be happier to dump Deke and Othella on them with Fwill and keep Sweets, but doubt Paxson would greenlight that. I'm curious though, wd people want to see Vince here as Allan's replacement--I wonder what a change of scene would do for the guy, whose career has been going down the drain alot like Griffey's in MLB *until this year's minor resurgence anyway).


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

*can't see it*

I'd love to believe that VC rumor but how could seattle possibly give up ray allen for kt, no matter who you put in there with him. I would practically give up anyone on the knicks to get VC but I doubt Seattle would do it.

And I'm not crazy about the bulls trade. It's like we're giving up too much for the chance that chandler is gonna be a star and crawford becomes more consistent. I just get the feeling that this time next year we'd just be thinking up unrealistic, semi-creative ways to get rid of chandler and crawford.

But, I'm not a GM.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

I expect to here a lot of OMFGNBASTAR2DKNICKS rumor's with all the free agent movement around the league.

To date not one of them has come true.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Vince would be nice but Knicks need some frontcourt help badly.


----------



## Courtking031 (Jul 7, 2004)

It would be very hard for NY to get Vince without giving up Starbury...That is Toronto's real only need.


----------



## the Trent Tuckers (Feb 15, 2004)

On Mike and the Maddog they were talking about the VC rumor and they talked about swapping Marbury for VC. In that case I dont see that trade making any sense for 2 reasons:
1) is that ESPN reported Rafer Alston is about to sign a 5 yr deal with the Raptors
2)what would we do without a pg, and about 5 guards/small forwards? And even if we could get Crawford for the point would this team be that much better?
But if we would have to get rid of Kurt, and maybe othella I would do it without a doubt.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Yucker,yyou are losing me....



> But if we would have to get rid of Kurt, and maybe othella I would do it without a doubt.


I assume you mean for Crawford not Vince...right???

Wow,Marbury for Vince.......

I guess it all depends..if we got JC...hmmmmmm

Got to say NO!!!!!!

I like TT and think he has a monster year...

Just get me Crawford,and chain Shan-done to the end of the bench


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

another rumor has the thomas bros,kurt and tim going foe vince and alvin williams....

done 

Marbury
H20
Vince
sweets 
naz

we will score 140 per and give up 150


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

H20 Starbury and Vince would give us one of the most potent offenses in the league.

Imagine Houston shooting open shots.

Imagine starbury with someone to pass it to.

All right enough no sense being optimistic.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Vince is brittle and mostly a perimeter player now, something like Ray Allen, but more brittle. Plus I don't like his mother and her involvement in his affairs and the team. I'd never give Marbury for him. I wouldn't give any more for him now than I would have for a healthy Houston, or Ray, or Michael Redd. I'd give less.

Plus Houston is cooked. He'll be a bench player before he's full health again.

I also think TT will be good for us.

So I prefer to keep TT and add Crawford.

Marbury, Crawford, TT

much better than 

Marbury, Shandon, Vince


----------



## djmyte (Jun 10, 2002)

Vince played in more games than Ray, Iverson, Kobe and Tmac last season. He is an injury risk but not really any more so than the those previously mentioned.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

It would be a good point if it weren't for the fact that he only played 43 games the prior year and 60 the year before that. 

It's one thing to get injured, it's another to become injury prone. For instance, AI's stock has also definitely dropped since his style of play is considered an injury risk.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

the real problem with vince is he has gotten a little soft and his game is almost completly perimeter,except fo an occasional" forray" to the hoop..thank you clyde


----------



## Junkyard Dog13 (Aug 9, 2003)

We would love to get Allen, and get of Carter.
Trust me you guys don'tr want him, he is not the same player he was 3 years ago, he fears to drive now, has become a perimiter shooter, does not play defence.
Plus he will whinew and ***** about who you sign and draft.

Its believed all of these rmours are bull but I'd like nothing more to get some one like Allen in return for Vince.

His mother has got involved in what the FO and ownerships business too much, she is a headcase.
Oak was quyoted in 2001 as saying "Glen Grundwald does nor run the Toronto Raptors, Michelle Carter does"


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I think Iverson for Carter is as good as it could get. Both fan favorites, both embattled with their teams, very similar salaries. Iverson is the better individual player but VC might mesh better with teammates. 

all told though, for two teams with fan favorites who might be due for a change it would seem the ideal swap.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

No thanks to the Answer.

Anyone on the Raps board will tell you I am anything but a VC appologist, but he will thrive in a new situation.

1) He won't be coddled as he is here
2) Hopefully he will have a decent surrounding cast... (unlike here)
3) ... with at least a decent frontcourt, which is something he has not had since AD, and Oakley.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

He could thrive anywhere if he can stay healthy, take the ball to the hole, stay aggressive under pressure, and dump his mom.

Why no to AI, who is it you're realistically hoping to get for him? How about SAR, he's got a similar contract.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> He could thrive anywhere if he can stay healthy, take the ball to the hole, stay aggressive under pressure, and dump his mom.
> 
> Why no to AI, who is it you're realistically hoping to get for him? How about SAR, he's got a similar contract.


Honestly, I want to get some very young players and offload Alvin in the deal. Fodder deals coming back should not exceed 2 years in length.

As you can tell by the handle, I want to Blow it up (not Bosh or Araujo). One guy, AI, Ray, Paul, SAR does nothing to improve this team's fortunes. We also need to get flexible in terms of the cap.

I want the Phoenix end of the Marbury deal to NY.

I know... "You wish".


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

That's fair, sounds wise/reasonable to me. I wouldn't mind getting Marshall from you guys but since he's got an expiring contract we have nothing to offer that he doesn't already have.


----------

