# What The Knicks Need At The Trade Deadline



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> The trade deadline is rapidly approaching, so you'll pardon Knicks fans if they're watching the news ticker with trepidation these days. Based on events of the past few years, followers of the Knicks have all but resigned themselves to reading something like "Knicks send F David Lee, G/F Quentin Richardson and 2009 first-round pick to Blazers for F Darius Miles" running across the bottom of their TV screens soon.
> 
> However, that scenario may be a little less likely this time around. For one, Isiah Thomas acquired every player on this roster, so making a deal now means trading one of the guys he was so anxious to obtain in the first place. Second, it appears owner James Dolan no longer has an open-checkbook policy with Thomas, restricting him from making the splashy, costly deals that have been Zeke's bread-and-butter in the past.
> 
> ...


http://www.nysun.com/article/48095

I want Ray Allen...


----------



## 0oh_S0o_FreSh!! (Jun 3, 2006)

i dont


----------



## 0oh_S0o_FreSh!! (Jun 3, 2006)

just kidding kitty. but for who? id like boykins or miller, korver, roy, shane battier, trevor ariza is better than jeffries, and younger, possibly al harrington, ike diogu. any of those can make me happy. but what upsets me is all these rumora of us trading frye which i hope zeke wont do.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Call me crazy but I think I've got an idea, LOL. Unlike what the author of that article said, I believe that the kind of change we need is major rather than minor; the reason being that minor would suggest a change to our bench. Our bench is not what is the problem considering they are the reason why our games are even close. Our starting lineup is what needs to be upgraded and anything involving the guys that should make you win can not be considered minor. This is why I propose these deals:

Knicks Trade (to the Bobcats):
Nate Robinson
2007 first round pick (the one we're suppose to swap with Chicago)

Knicks Recieve (from the Bobcats):
Brevin Knight
2nd round draft pick

*I think this deal easily gets accepted. Brevin Knight is a ridiculously talented ball play that alot of people covet despite being aged. A young up and coming Bobcat team has no real use for him anymore especially with the emergence of Raymond Felton. Who they could have use for is Nate Robinson who has the talent to be one of the best 6th men in the league in the near future and a first round draft pick that could aid in their quest to become a solid basketball team. I'm hesitant to give up that draft pick because I know Zeke's draft record so I'd prefer to offer a fraction of $3 million instead. Hopefully they bite on that so we can keep our pick. My second option before reverting to dealing the pick would be to substitute Mardy Collins in the deal* 

Knicks Trade (to the Atlanta Hawks):
Brevin Knight...PG
Channing Frye...F/C

Knicks Recieve (from the Atlanta Hawks):
Josh Smith...F
Josh Childress...G/F
Royal Ivey...PG
2nd round draft pick

*I really like both Smith's and Childress' basketball game. You all know about Smith and how I feel about him so I won't rehash. The newbie in this revised deal is Josh Childress. With his length at 6-8 nearly 6-9, he has proven to be a solid defender. He has a solid all around game that includes his ability to stretch the defense from 3, a much appreciated benefit. He's still very very young and shows the promise of being something of a Loul Deng who scores points, rebounds and is very very good at both facets of defense. I hope that he bulks up however because at his weight he may have trouble playing the more physical perimeter players in the league. We give up alot in this deal moving Channing Frye who will be an OUTSTANDING offensive player as the journalist mentioned before. Brevin Knight has also been a very hot commodity that fills a very weak position for the Hawks, PG. *


Knicks Trade (to the T'Wolves):
Stephon Marbury...PG
2 2nd Round Draft picks
cash

Knicks Recieve (from T'Wolves):
Randy Foye...PG
Marko Jaric...G/F
Troy Hudson...PG

*This deal might be pretty tough to pull off because I know Kevin McHale loves Randy Foye but I know he also loves Kevin Garnett, Stephon Marbury and probably most importantly, his job. McHale is currently on the hot seat as the Wolves are floundering and could lose their best player in franchise history through a trade. He knows that the only way to avoid this happening and keep his job is to get this team to win and that burden is to much for a young player like Foye to take responsibility for. This is why I believe he'd have alot of interest in Stephon Marbury who has rapport with Garnett and also has the star power to add to the Wolves. Realistically, this move should captupult them close to the top in the Western Conference.

We'd get a young star who has the potential to be an all-star on the perimeter but have to take on contracts like Marko Jaric and Troy Hudson. Hudson could and should be bought out while Jaric is actually a good fit for this team. *
Knicks Trade (to the Warriors):
Jerome James
Kelvin Cato

Knicks Recieve (from the Warriors):
Adonal Foyle

*...Isiah has played Jerome James at the 4 but a guy like Foyle is a better player, a better fit at the 4 and a better influence on a young group of players.*

What do you guys think of a rotation that looks something like this:

Starters:
Randy Foye...PG
Quentin Richardson...SG
Josh Childress...SF
Josh Smith...PF
Eddy Curry...C

Reserves:
Steve Francis...PG
Jamal Crawford...G
Marko Jaric...G/F
David Lee...F
Adonal Foyle...C


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Weak....*

Qrich is too slow to defend 2s like he defends 3s. No rebounding to speak of. No perimeter game outside of the backcourt. Frontcourt is too small at 6'8, 6'9, 6'11. Its like the Hawks plus Curry. Johnson is better than Foye and Qrich combined. Move Smith to the 3, and keep Lee. Need another true guard with size.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Weak....*



alphaorange said:


> Qrich is too slow to defend 2s like he defends 3s. No rebounding to speak of. No perimeter game outside of the backcourt. Frontcourt is too small at 6'8, 6'9, 6'11. Its like the Hawks plus Curry. Johnson is better than Foye and Qrich combined. Move Smith to the 3, and keep Lee. Need another true guard with size.



Since when is a 6-8 SF not to far away from 6-9 considered small in the NBA? Josh Childress is a lengthy 6-8 at that and can rebound (evident from his solid string of rebounding games last year when given the minutes). That length and speed he has is enough to counter 2's as you mentioned which make him an excellent compliment to Quentin Richardson.

As for Josh Smith, he plays bigger than he actually is. Besides, if he's a better defender and rebounder than Frye, what difference does it make that he's shorter? Channing Frye is taller than Ben Wallace but it doesn't make him a better defender.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Weak....*

ya know there is this thing called defensive switches ...making childress guard the 2 and Q guard 3's ...


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*NO TRADES! untill the offseason.* 

The Knicks must Live or Die with the Roster they started with this season...


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Come on guys...*

Josh Smith is limited offensively, as is the other Josh. Smaller doesn't always mean shorter. Childress is a lot like Jeffries with an occasional jumper. You're putting 2 guys that would have trouble averaging 25-30 combined on the Knicks and making Smith guard PFs every night. These guys are playing on a decent team, talent-wise, and they suck. All they need is a role player as a big, and a distributing PG and they SHOULD be very good. They already have a role playing center position, so why are they so bad? Maybe because guys are playing out of position? Let me know when Childress is a starting quality player and Josh Smith is an everyday PF for an extended time and I will be the first to say you guys got it going on. I just don't see it.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Call me crazy but I think I've got an idea, LOL. Unlike what the author of that article said, I believe that the kind of change we need is major rather than minor; the reason being that minor would suggest a change to our bench. Our bench is not what is the problem considering they are the reason why our games are even close. Our starting lineup is what needs to be upgraded and anything involving the guys that should make you win can not be considered minor. This is why I propose these deals:
> 
> Knicks Trade (to the Bobcats):
> Nate Robinson
> ...


Terrible. There's not a player in that entire group that leads us anywhere other than the lottery and we abandon all of our picks.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> *NO TRADES! untill the offseason.*
> 
> The Knicks must Live or Die with the Roster they started with this season...



Why? If there's a chance to improve the team long term, take it. Isiah is keeping his job either way.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Come on guys...*



alphaorange said:


> Josh Smith is limited offensively, as is the other Josh. Smaller doesn't always mean shorter. Childress is a lot like Jeffries with an occasional jumper. You're putting 2 guys that would have trouble averaging 25-30 combined on the Knicks and making Smith guard PFs every night. These guys are playing on a decent team, talent-wise, and they suck. All they need is a role player as a big, and a distributing PG and they SHOULD be very good. They already have a role playing center position, so why are they so bad? Maybe because guys are playing out of position? Let me know when Childress is a starting quality player and Josh Smith is an everyday PF for an extended time and I will be the first to say you guys got it going on. I just don't see it.



Why does Josh Smith have to be an offensive player for this team? The idea of getting him is to acquire a shot blocker that is going to make our defense formidable down the line. The same goes for a guy like Josh Childress who plays pretty tight defense and can also block a couple shots while operating the offense on occassion. This game ain't all about scoring.

Besides, we have 3 potential 20ppg scorers in the starting lineup next to those guys. Randy Foye, Eddy Curry and Quentin Richardson all are capable of putting up those kind of consistent numbers which would place them as one of the highest scoring trios in the league. You add in the fact that you still have Jamal Crawford, who is good for 15ppg, Marko Jaric who is good for double digit ppg, and David Lee whose another double digit ppg player and you have a pretty solid scoring team, so what is the problem? That's at least 85ppg between those players and that's not including the amount that Josh Childress and Josh Smith would score in the starting lineup not to mention that Steve Francis is always an option for points on the bench.

P.S., I just wanted to let you know that Josh Childress is an everyday starting caliber player and Josh Smith has been playing the 4 since the beginning of the season. Your welcome for that update. Watch there games a few times a year.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Terrible. There's not a player in that entire group that leads us anywhere other than the lottery and we abandon all of our picks.



We abandon all our picks? Reread the post again. I suggested giving up just one pick this year and that was a worse case scenario. I made it clear that I'd prefer to throw money or Mardy Collins into the equation before that draft pick. If all else fails, I'd surrender it considering the quality young talent we'd get back. If you believe we're giving up to many young players in the deal, let's just see.

The young players involved in the deals I proposed are Nate Robinson, Channing Frye and either our 1st round pick this year OR Mardy Collins. In return for those guys and the others mentioned, we recieve Josh Childress, Josh Smith, Randy Foye, and Royal Ivey. So essentially we'd be giving up 3 young players but be bringing in 4 young players who also were pretty much lottery picks. Marko Jaric is younger than Stephon Marbury and Adonal Foyle is younger than Jerome James so you may be able to include them in this equation. For arguement's sake, you could say we brought in 6 young players in place of 3 older ones so in what way are we "giving up all of our picks?"

As for making the playoffs, "F" the playoffs. I like the kind of potential we got going here with the younger guys left behind and want to surround them with more relavent young players who can help them win big down the road. We might not make the playoffs but we'd be in a hell of a position to make things happen next year. I honestly believe Randy Foye will be a big time player in this league and Curry is already dominating on a consistent basis. You add those players into the equation, all of which are better defenders and jump shooters than we currently have and it may be very well possible to still make the playoffs.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Come on guys...*



alphaorange said:


> Josh Smith is limited offensively, as is the other Josh. Smaller doesn't always mean shorter. Childress is a lot like Jeffries with an occasional jumper. You're putting 2 guys that would have trouble averaging 25-30 combined on the Knicks and making Smith guard PFs every night. These guys are playing on a decent team, talent-wise, and they suck. All they need is a role player as a big, and a distributing PG and they SHOULD be very good. They already have a role playing center position, so why are they so bad? Maybe because guys are playing out of position? Let me know when Childress is a starting quality player and Josh Smith is an everyday PF for an extended time and I will be the first to say you guys got it going on. I just don't see it.



I also find it humorous that Josh Smith and Josh Childress would have trouble putting up 25ppg-30ppg on the Knicks when they are already putting up a combined 27ppg on the Hawks. When you consider that Childress would be starting with the Knicks and would be getting pretty good looks at the basket, it is very easy to assume that his scoring numbers should go up. On a Hawks team where he seldom has very many open looks, Childress is shooting 53% from the field and 42% from beyond the arch, good for top 5 in the league. Could you imagine that next to Curry? 

As for Josh, he's still refining his offensive game because that's what young people do, improve. On a recent streak he has put up 20 or more points on about 50% shooting 6 of the last 8 games. As the season has progressed, he has become noteworthily better on the offensive end of the floor and still remains a threat on the boards and on defense.

So I ask you again, what is wrong with both of these players? Mind you, they've been relegated to role players with the Hawks on offense behind Joe Johnson and Marvin Williams yet have showed remarkable promise. Considering all the dimensions we can present for them as a team and them for us, I think these guys would fit in perfectly and help us win big down the road.


P.S., you are confusing me with the "small" business. You mentioned that the team was small with a 6-8 sf, a 6-9 pf and 6-11 center. When I mentioned the prowess of that 6-8 sf and 6-9 pf on defense and rebounds, you now are saying that "small does not always mean shorter." My question is, what do you really mean?

As for why the Hawks are not playing up to the ability of their talent, it is because they are young. Apparently people do not understand this but young players take time to develop and undoubtedly will develop. They got some solid players on that team that are on the brink of turning things around. Their main issue at the moment is the height of the players or even if you think they are playing out of position (which is ridiculous since those numbers they put up do not suggest anything about them not being in a comfort zone). The Hawks main issue comes at the PG position and injuries this season. This is especially why they'd be interested in the package I mentioned earlier because they get that PG and also get a star in the making with Channing Frye who can be the future center you claim they need.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Think about it....*

I mean Childress is a twig and Smith is only 235. Thats pretty small to be your everyday sf and pf. As far as scoring, I've watched those guys and they don't really have an offensive game. They score because somebody has to other than Joe Johnson and they get a ton of garbage. Garbage pickers are fine but someone has to be a real offensive threat on your team. Considering they have every opportunity to put up real numbers, they are not. I told you I like Smith...just not as a PF on a regular basis. I do think he could get minutes there and that is a plus. Childress is a bench player. No way he starts on the Knicks or any other decent team. Lee is even better at SF. If you are banking on Foye to average 20, you are really using your imagination since he has not come close to it for any stretch yet. Can he? Maybe, but it would be foolish to build around the necessity of him being a bigtime scorer and also that Qrich's back holds up. Lots of supposition there, twink. I could be persuaded to give up Frye for Smith and team him with Lee and Curry, although I would be banking on both to improve from the outside Foye, I like as well, but not with Qrich. I'd be looking for someone more dependable health-wise and more able to guard 2's. I like Nichols from SU late in the first. Great stroke...6'8 with a mid game with huge range and a nearly 7' wingspan. He also loves to play defense and is athletic. Not a 1st option but would be a great role player. More of a 3 but might be able to play the 2 if he can improve his handle a bit.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

My top priorities would be a PG, and a defensive 4.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

XMATTHEWX said:


> My top priorities would be a PG, and a defensive 4.


Josh Smith would be a great defensive 4 to pick up in my opinion.


----------



## C-Rave (Nov 24, 2006)

The Knicks need a shot blocker, plain and simple. Here is another suggestion, just wait until some contracts expire or something to get rid of some cap room. When does Malik Rose's contract go up, he is vastly overpaid. Stever Francis' is up in like what 2 more years. It will be hard, but I say just wait. The best way to free up cap room is to wait. But knowing Zeke he will do something at the deadline, I expect it to be big though. I promise you that. Someone we least expect will be wearing Orange and Blue soon.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: This is irrelevant....*



alphaorange said:


> I mean Childress is a twig and Smith is only 235. Thats pretty small to be your everyday sf and pf. As far as scoring, I've watched those guys and they don't really have an offensive game. They score because somebody has to other than Joe Johnson and they get a ton of garbage. Garbage pickers are fine but someone has to be a real offensive threat on your team. Considering they have every opportunity to put up real numbers, they are not. I told you I like Smith...just not as a PF on a regular basis. I do think he could get minutes there and that is a plus. Childress is a bench player. No way he starts on the Knicks or any other decent team. Lee is even better at SF. If you are banking on Foye to average 20, you are really using your imagination since he has not come close to it for any stretch yet. Can he? Maybe, but it would be foolish to build around the necessity of him being a bigtime scorer and also that Qrich's back holds up. Lots of supposition there, twink. I could be persuaded to give up Frye for Smith and team him with Lee and Curry, although I would be banking on both to improve from the outside Foye, I like as well, but not with Qrich. I'd be looking for someone more dependable health-wise and more able to guard 2's. I like Nichols from SU late in the first. Great stroke...6'8 with a mid game with huge range and a nearly 7' wingspan. He also loves to play defense and is athletic. Not a 1st option but would be a great role player. More of a 3 but might be able to play the 2 if he can improve his handle a bit.



Josh Howard and Tayshaun Prince are twigs as well but I do not believe you'd be foolish enough to dismiss them as players because they are too thin. The difference between them and Childress is that they have been given an opportunity to prove themselves while Childress has not on a team extremely deep at his position. Do not see that as a knock on him because remember that Boris Diaw was also buried on that squad and we see what he can do now. Childress could have a big impact on a game because of his defense. Watch him sometime because he's an excellent player in general. He's not a go to guy on offense but certainly will knock down shots when they are there which is indicated through his excellent shooting numbers. That is exactly what I'd want Childress to do on this team because I predict Foye, Richardson and Curry being the key in our offensive attack.


As far as Josh Smith's weight being a concern, I think you should do the research and take a look around the league. Chris Bosh is 230 lbs and dominates on a regular basis. Rasheed Wallace is also 230lbs. Kenyon Martin is 240 lbs. Marcus Camby as a *CENTER OUT WEST* is 235 lbs. Shawn Marion is 225 and David West is 240 lbs. Those guys are representative of some of the best big men the league has to offer and all of them are pretty effective on the defensive end. They also have in common the fact that they are all to light in your opinion to be big men but they still manage to be some of the best in there field? Me thinks you should go back to the drawing board with your assumption Josh Smith is to small to do anything. Honestly, the guys just turned 21 years old and you think he's done filling out into his body? Again, the guy is someone who looks like he lifts regularly and obviously will continue to fill out. Considering he's not light by any standards of the word for that position and the fact he's only going to get bigger and I think it's ridiculous to assume he can't be a big man.

Smith just like Childress are not finished developing into their games. I certainly do not believe they are go to guys on offense but that does not mean they are "garbage" players there. Joe Johnson as good a player as he is is not that dominant to draw the kind of attention necessary to chalk up their points as gimme's from Johnson. A guy like Curry however, due to the sheer fact of where and how he plays, could provide those guys with the looks that can make the game easier the way you think Johnson does for them. I could easily see an increase in scoring production from both especially considering that it's happening right now as we speak.

As far as the scoring trio I'd have on this team, they'd be alright. Foye in the little time he has been given has shown he can put the ball in the basket. You give him starter minutes and I think he approaches 20 every night barring the few bad games a rookie is bound to have. If he does flounder early on, there is always the option of starting Steve Francis who was playing the PG position pretty effectively for a short stretch before he got injuried. There is always Jamal Crawford given more offensive responsibility as well, so anyway you cut it we'd be alright offensively and emmensely better defensively because of Childress and Smith. That's the benefit of having a deep team; guys like Richardson could be preserved better during the season because of a more efficient roster.

As for Nochls, I have not seen him play but I'll be to keep an eye on him before I pass judgement. I wouldn't be against bringing him in, in addition to the players I suggested if he is worth the hassel.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Don't believe all the weights you see posted.*

Ewing was still listed at 240 late in his career. More like 260. You should watch more games of the Hawks. Childress shoots a knuckleball and his % is so high because of the garbage.....same with Smith, who by the way has played substantial minutes at the 3 and 2 according to 82games. He is also allowing 50% against him. Not exactly a stopper.

Perhaps you should peruse that site. If I read the numbers right, Smith is playing far more at SF than PF and Childress is playing significant 2guard. Josh Smith has an effective jumpshot % of 31% and Childress is 43%, while also allowing his opponents a high (nearly 50%) effective %. Nothing stands out from either. Tell me again why we should build with them where you want them. 

Childress= off the bench= smaller version of JJeffries

Smith= SF and ocassional PF = versatile role player (which is OK). He is NOT going to be the second coming of AK47, nor Chris Bosh.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

alpha you are putting down garbage baskets like they aren't as good when in fact in most cases they are better .

no one is looking to make childress a scoring option , most guards outside the offense shoot low %'s with low points ...he gets a decent amount of points with high % shots from both the field and (he shoots 40% from 3), plus he plays good defense ...a team cant have enough of those especially with a quality low post threat to feed off of.

if he can shoot like that without a post presense diverting attention think of what he could do in ny.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Don't believe all the weights you see posted.*



alphaorange said:


> Ewing was still listed at 240 late in his career. More like 260. You should watch more games of the Hawks. Childress shoots a knuckleball and his % is so high because of the garbage.....same with Smith, who by the way has played substantial minutes at the 3 and 2 according to 82games. He is also allowing 50% against him. Not exactly a stopper.
> 
> Perhaps you should peruse that site. If I read the numbers right, Smith is playing far more at SF than PF and Childress is playing significant 2guard. Josh Smith has an effective jumpshot % of 31% and Childress is 43%, while also allowing his opponents a high (nearly 50%) effective %. Nothing stands out from either. Tell me again why we should build with them where you want them.
> 
> ...


Well since the NBA is in some conspiracy to lie about people's weight, then why can we not assume that Josh Smith weighs more than he actually is? He did bulk up significantly from last season yet came in at about the same weight from last year.

As far as Childress is concerned, he does shoot a knuckleball but it goes it. Silly me, I thought that the ball going in the basket is what really mattered. As far as how he scores his points, it doesn't matter to me because he still is an excellent perimeter shooter which he has proven since his days in college. If he collects alot of garbage points, then so be it. It does not change the fact he can knock down perimeter shots consistently so I see his ability to get garbage points as more of a bonus since he's bound to get those and tons of open shots on the Knicks which would improve his production significantly. Either way you cut it, your just bolstering the fact that he's a pretty good all around scorer because you don't exactly get "garbage" baskets from the 3 point line.

As for all this 82 game stuff, give me the exact link where you are finding this information since it's so readily available to you. I haven't been able to find any information regarding what you mentioned but I did find something that tells you just how accurate they are. When discussing the ratings of players on the Hawks, Slava Medevenko is a better player than Joe Johnson. You were saying?

If you even go by the numbers mentioned there, then you'd realize that the Hawks win the most games with Josh Smith at the 4 spot and Josh Childress at the 2 guard and 3 spot.

http://www.82games.com/0607/06ATL8C.HTM
http://www.82games.com/0607/06ATL10C.HTM

As far as that jumpshot, let's see what they can do with them wide open. I'm not to keen on that website of yours since those stats obviously do not tell the whole story. With Curry, they are bound to be pretty effective jump shooters although I predict and would prefer Smith to be more of a face up player.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Just a side note. You attempt to criticize Childress' jump shot yet it is actually not ranked to badly compared to some of the more prominent shooters in the league. You mentioned Childress hits 43% of his jump shots. Well...

Michael Redd hits 45% of his jump shots, Jason Richardson at 38%, Vladimir Radmanovic at 47% and Peja Stojackovic at 48.8% . Considering what open shots could do for Childress' jump shot, I would not go anywhere close to saying he is a poor jump shooter with that kind of shooting percentage.


----------



## 0oh_S0o_FreSh!! (Jun 3, 2006)

Dude, we get it. why do you go to extreme measures just to prove someone wrong. Its great for you that you know so much about Bball. but you dont need 10 posts per thread to prove people wrong, i mean you posted some ideas and people criticize its what people do. I highly credit you for your IQ, and i now your good, but you gotta know to stop..


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*The Knicks need to pull their act together with the roster they have now. 
Any trades of players comming in or going out will only hurt this Knick team from finishing the season with a 500 average.*


----------

