# Watch Isiah trade all his youth



## meltinjohn (Jun 6, 2006)

To get Kobe. 
Its already bad enough he got Zach when he had Francis's deal expiring + Zach is an f'n ballhog. Wheres David Lee gonna get pt? At the 3 LOL? 
I can easily see a trade of M Rose, J, Jeffries, Lee and Balkman for Kobe


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

meltinjohn said:


> To get Kobe.
> Its already bad enough he got Zach when he had Francis's deal expiring + Zach is an f'n ballhog. Wheres David Lee gonna get pt? At the 3 LOL?
> I can easily see a trade of M Rose, J, Jeffries, Lee and Balkman for Kobe



thats not all the knicks youth and i think most fans would ok that deal.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> thats not all the knicks youth and i think most fans would ok that deal.


Pretty much.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

If the Knicks got Kobe that cheaply Isiah would probably take the Exec of the Year award away from Ainge.


----------



## bmac (Feb 18, 2007)

meltinjohn said:


> I can easily see a trade of M Rose, J, Jeffries, Lee and Balkman for Kobe


Yeah i can see the Lakers being all over that deal...


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

bmac said:


> Yeah i can see the Lakers being all over that deal...


On the bright side it would put them in the driver's seat for either Mayo or Rose. :bsmile:


----------



## meltinjohn (Jun 6, 2006)

OJ Mayo won't turn around any ballclub especially if hes gonna be another Arenas type. I think the clips will get him myself.
And to that Kobe deal for NY, an extra piece may also need to be added, but I know I'd rather keep Lee and Balkman both over the chance to get Kobe.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

If we can keep ONE of Lee/Balkman and put in Nate instead, I'd rather do that, but if not I take that deal. 

C: Curry
PF: Zach
SF: Q
SG: Kobe
PG: Marbury 

With Marbury's sudden desire to be a playmaker (and Nate's if he's as sincere as he looked in Summer League) that's a team that I think could contend for a playoff spot and more if Kobe and Isiah pushed the rest of that team and demanded they play defense.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

meltinjohn said:


> OJ Mayo won't turn around any ballclub especially if hes gonna be another Arenas type. I think the clips will get him myself.
> And to that Kobe deal for NY, an extra piece may also need to be added, but I know I'd rather keep Lee and Balkman both over the chance to get Kobe.


Yes, well, forgive us if we find the claim that a team is better off with a pair of roleplayers than one of the three best players on the face of the planet is somewhat risible. And The Wiz seem to improved since Gilbert came to town, I think whoever ends up with Mayo will be fine.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

knicksfan said:


> If we can keep ONE of Lee/Balkman and put in Nate instead, I'd rather do that, but if not I take that deal.
> 
> C: Curry
> PF: Zach
> ...


If they can put out that starting lineup we better be contending.

19 and 8 in curry 20 and 10 in Zach, Kobe with 30+ 5 and 5, and Marbury at 15 and 5. Of course they can't all average that over a season but on any given night these guys can hit these numbers and more. With that you expect more than hope to make the playoffs.

Of course I don't think that's feasable at all (the trade).


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> If the Knicks got Kobe that cheaply Isiah would probably take the Exec of the Year award away from Ainge.



and having kevin mcchale as a good friend didnt have anything to do with that trade huh?


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

ChosenFEW said:


> and having kevin mcchale as a good friend didnt have anything to do with that trade huh?


Let's face it, just about everyone comes out ahead when trading with Kevin McHale. Though in Kevin's defense it took Danny until the second try to take him to the cleaners.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

I think that proposed trade is pretty even. But because of the way scoring is overvalued in the league, I don't see the Lakers accepting the deal.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

meltinjohn said:


> To get Kobe.
> Its already bad enough he got Zach when he had Francis's deal expiring + Zach is an f'n ballhog. Wheres David Lee gonna get pt? At the 3 LOL?
> I can easily see a trade of M Rose, J, Jeffries, Lee and Balkman for Kobe


*The above trade would be giving the Lakers Coach Jax all the Knicks best coachable players.* 
Leaving the Knicks with Ball-Hoggers Marbury, Crawford, Zach, Curry, and Kobe. Each wanting 30 or more mpg or else they will start havoc throughout the regular season.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

meltinjohn said:


> To get Kobe.
> Its already bad enough he got Zach when he had Francis's deal expiring + Zach is an f'n ballhog. Wheres David Lee gonna get pt? At the 3 LOL?
> I can easily see a trade of M Rose, J, Jeffries, Lee and Balkman for Kobe


Not a bad trade actually.

Knicks have enough depth to make that trade.

Curry
Randolph
Richardson or Crawford
Kobe
Marbury

It is a great if not the best starting lineup on paper anyway.


----------



## da1nonly (May 8, 2006)

Dean the Master said:


> Not a bad trade actually.
> 
> Knicks have enough depth to make that trade.
> 
> ...


Paper can be torn


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

But I won't be shocked if LA ask for Crawford and Nate while sending Vujacic and Radman to NY. They'll take Crawford because they will need a replacement at SG while Nate add depth at PG (and is a better player than Sasha)


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Zuca said:


> But I won't be shocked if LA ask for Crawford and Nate while sending Vujacic and Radman to NY. They'll take Crawford because they will need a replacement at SG while Nate add depth at PG (and is a better player than Sasha)


So the incentive in this trade for the Knicks is to become a worse team? Vajacic and Radmanovic certainly do not command the trade value or quality of performance to substitute or even approach what Nate and Crawford can do. 

Only trades I make with LA is for Kobe, Odom or both.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> So the incentive in this trade for the Knicks is to become a worse team? Vujacic and Radmanovic certainly do not command the trade value or quality of performance to substitute or even approach what Nate and Crawford can do.
> 
> Only trades I make with LA is for Kobe, Odom or both.


Well, I guess that I was misunderstood, I put Crawford and Nate in the Kobe idea...

My idea was Malik Rose, Jeffries, Lee, Balkman, Crawford and Nate for Kobe, Radmanovic and Vujacic... Which I think that Lakers may bite and it would be a good move for NY (since they'll get Kobe).


----------



## meltinjohn (Jun 6, 2006)

It still wouldn't beat the big 3 in Boston tho.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Zuca said:


> Well, I guess that I was misunderstood, I put Crawford and Nate in the Kobe idea...
> 
> My idea was Malik Rose, Jeffries, Lee, Balkman, Crawford and Nate for Kobe, Radmanovic and Vujacic... Which I think that Lakers may bite and it would be a good move for NY (since they'll get Kobe).


That was my fault and I apologize for it. I could go for that deal was well but I honestly believe we'd have a little bit more than we needed on the offensive end of the floor; Kobe, Marbury, Randolph and Curry? Doesn't seem to be necessary and could be invested in other aspects of the game we'd still have issues with like defense and shot blocking.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

meltinjohn said:


> It still wouldn't beat the big 3 in Boston tho.



I recall the Lakers having a big 4 that certainly created more hype than the Celtic's big 3 who didn't win a title in part because of the same issues the Celtics have, injuries.

I wouldn't put it past the Knicks to be better than the Celtics with Kobe considering that Kobe is the best player on either team.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

I'm suprise that the Lakers Exec Phil Jackson did not try to get a trade with the Knicks for just Nate Robinson this offseason. Nate Robinson would fit great in Phil Jax Triangle Plan for a running team and Nate open 3-pointers with playmaker Kobe & Odom leading the show.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Kiyaman said:


> I'm suprise that the Lakers Exec Phil Jackson did not try to get a trade with the Knicks for just Nate Robinson this offseason. Nate Robinson would fit great in Phil Jax Triangle Plan for a running team and Nate open 3-pointers with playmaker Kobe & Odom leading the show.


jackson doesn't like small guards.


----------



## mqtcelticsfan (Apr 2, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I recall the Lakers having a big 4 that certainly created more hype than the Celtic's big 3 who didn't win a title in part because of the same issues the Celtics have, injuries.


URGH!!! How many god damn times will I have to hear this comparison? The Lakers had Shaq, Kobe, and 2 players well past their primes. And with those two players way, way, way past their best basketball, they still made the fricking finals. While KG/Pierce can't touch Shaq/Kobe, Ray Allen is leagues better than a mid-late 30s Payton or Malone.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

mqtcelticsfan said:


> URGH!!! How many god damn times will I have to hear this comparison? The Lakers had Shaq, Kobe, and 2 players well past their primes. And with those two players way, way, way past their best basketball, they still made the fricking finals. While KG/Pierce can't touch Shaq/Kobe, Ray Allen is leagues better than a mid-late 30s Payton or Malone.


that laker team also had a battle tested veteran roster who had been together for years who knew their roles and a hall of fame coach.

the celts gutted their team for garnett and allen and are coached by the father of a 13 who beat your starting point guard in a shooting drill....the celts are 3 stars and little else.

they aren't the same and the season should tell if they are worth all the hype.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

mqtcelticsfan said:


> URGH!!! How many god damn times will I have to hear this comparison? The Lakers had Shaq, Kobe, and 2 players well past their primes. And with those two players way, way, way past their best basketball, they still made the fricking finals. While KG/Pierce can't touch Shaq/Kobe, Ray Allen is leagues better than a mid-late 30s Payton or Malone.


Just to add to what DaGrinch mentioned, Karl Malone and Gary Payton were well just a season removed from 20ppg and 8rpg and 20ppg and 8apg. One season did not make that dramatic a difference in their ability to play the game on that level.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Agree Twink...*

They had PLENTY of talent on that roster. The issues were more of a chemistry nature.


----------

