# A Response to the JO and KG Trade Rumors?



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

If these rumors are true, here's one of the largest trades I've ever thought of. I think it gets it done for all teams involved and actually helps all teams involved:

*New York Knicks Trade (to the Suns):*
Channing Frye…F/C
Nate Robinson…G
23rd pick
Cash considerations

*Knicks Receive (from the Suns):*
4th pick
Marcus Banks and the 29th pick

*Knicks Trade:*
David Lee…F
Randolph Morris…C
Jared Jefferies….SF
Malik Rose…F
Steve Francis…PG
Marcus Banks…PG
Jerome James…C
Kelvin Cato…C
Future 2nd round draft pick
4th pick
29th pick

*Knicks Receive:*
Kevin Garnett…F
Troy Hudson…PG
Vladimir Radmanovic….F
Jason Collins…C

*Lakers Trade:*
Lamar Odom…F
Andrew Bynum…C
Brian Cook…F/C
Vladimir Radmanovic…F

*Lakers Receive:*
Jermaine O’Neal…F/C
Mike James….G
Eddie House…G
29th pick 
Future 2nd round pick


*Minnesota Trade:*
Kevin Garnett…F
Trenton Hassell…G/F
Troy Hudson…PG
Mike James…PG

*Minnesota Recieves:*
Richard Jefferson…SF
Marcus Banks…PG
Malik Rose…F
Randolph Morris…C
Jerome James…C
4th pick

*Indiana Pacers:*
Jermaine O’Neal…F/C

*Indiana Recieves:*
Steve Francis…G
Jared Jefferies…F
Andrew Bynum…C
David Lee…F


*New Jersey Nets Trade:*
Richard Jefferson…SF
Jason Collins…C

* New Jersey Nets Receive:*
Lamar Odom….F
Trenton Hassell…G/F
Kelvin Cato…C


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

The Knicks get KG, a backup PF that would open up the game for Curry when KG rests in Vladimir Radmanovic, a solid backup center with Collins and a bad contract in Hudson, who should be bought out.

The Lakers get another star player to put next to Kobe that could dominate. James is the PG they need with them letting Smush Parker walk via free agency; James is a perfect fit. Eddie House is filler but can shoot jumpers. 

The Wolves bring in a solid player in Jefferson that could be the complimentary piece to a future star. He could be the stepping stone to getting them back on track post KG. They also recieve the 4th pick which very well could be the future star I have been referring to in addition to a 1st round caliber player in Morris. James and Rose are cap fillers.

The Pacers recieve as good a package they could recieve for a guy that may have demanded a trade. If those rumors are true, the ball is in our court since the Pacers HAVE to find a team to take JO. In return for him, they get a pretty good package with a solid young player that could be a franchise player in Bynum. They also recieve David Lee which helps them solidfy a future all-star caliber front court. Jefferies is a capable player as a defender in certain systems and Francis is cap filler and potential trade bait once his contract enters its final year.

The Nets make the trade because Odom is capable of playing the 4 and scoring next to Krstic which is what there looking for. Odom is significantly better than the player he was with the Heat, so they very well would be recieving an all-star in the East. Hassell is a swingman replacement for Jefferson; he plays excellent defense and is a solid role player.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

It looks like the (33-49) Knicks will make some trades this offseason, what worries me the most is Isiah Thomas past career of trading players and signing FA veterans for this Knick team, and where it lead the team (from 23-59 to a 33-49 season). 
*It's become hard to imagine Isiah Thomas making a decent trade or signing a decent FA this offseason that fits right with this knick team. *

The Knicks Brass and alot of their fans dont see that Eddy Curry was a very BIG mistake for this team when they just drafted Frye, Lee, Nate, and picked-up a walking rookie FA Jackie Butler. 

Keeping Sweetney and Tim Thomas and the first round draft picks would've been a BIG-Plus and BLESSING for Frye, Lee, Nate, Butler, and the Knicks organization. 

*Players like KG and O'Neal dont want to be on the court with a LAZY 7' footer TURN-OVER teamate like Eddy Curry, especially at crunchtime. They would rather have hustling teammates like Lee & Balkman alongside of them the majority of the game (for the WIN).* 

How are you going to build a team around a 7' foot player (Eddy Curry) that been in the league for 6 years and have NO Playoff experience and not one year of averaging a Double-Double? 

How far do you think a NO-LEADERSHIP PG (Marbury & Francis) will take you in the regular season with their previous teams career records got better once they traded these PG? 

How long will it take Isiah Thomas to learn that trading for and signing FA ONE-DIMENSIONAL Players ONLY makes his team a LOSING-TEAM: 

*ONE Dimensional Knick Players: 

Marbury, Crawford, Malik, Q.Richardson, James, Francis, Jefferies, and Eddy Curry,* that is way too many (8) One Dimensional Players on this Knick Team. 

*P.S.* Q.Richardson never played defense untill after being coached a season by Larry Brown, if he did have a decent defensive performance the Clippers and Suns would've kept him and made him a keeper like Diaw & Bell.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

knicks trade

JEFFRIES
CRAWFORD
JAMES

4

indiana trade

O`NEAL
WILLIAMS


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*This is the fantasy league board?*

Like there is ANY chance of that scenario happening. Plus you just gave away the KNick future for the next 10 years. No cap space, no youth of consequence, no picks. Doesn't get much worse than that. All for the CHANCE that the gutted team left can win a title. Fat chance.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

As much as i like KG for the time being its probably a pipedream for him to come to NY , without ending deals to soften the long term deals they have absorbed guys like hudson, hassell , jaric and mike james and such there will be no deal without giving up another superstar and the knicks dont have one to spare.

O'neal to me is a far more likely scenerio , seeing as he never would have resigned in the 1st place if he had known they were going to fire Thomas, which they did a month after resigning him and they promised him during negotiations that they were going to retain him, They did Jermaine wrong so in my opinion they have a moral obligation to try and do right by him and at least try to make a deal for him.

that and the fact the Pacers are going nowhere it needs to hit rock bottom and start over so dealing him makes sense and start from the ground up with some new blood....the knicks have young talent , the ability to absord bad contracts and a willingness to deal for Jermaine all of which makes them strong trade partners.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> It looks like the (33-49) Knicks will make some trades this offseason, what worries me the most is Isiah Thomas past career of trading players and signing FA veterans for this Knick team, and where it lead the team (from 23-59 to a 33-49 season).
> *It's become hard to imagine Isiah Thomas making a decent trade or signing a decent FA this offseason that fits right with this knick team. *
> 
> *Trading players is not what worries me with Isiah; signing players are. A majority of the team presently constructed has been brought in through some sort of trade and from what I see, we don't have a bad young foundation established. Even trades people have questioned like the Richardson deal has worked out in the end. *
> ...


*Once again, watch the Suns because Diaw is actually a poor defender that usually gets beat consistently. There’s a reason why he excelled so much last year and that was because he was either playing the 4 or the 5 where his physique gave him an advantage on both ends of the floor. As for Richardson, he still plays defense and scores the ball making him multi-dimensional so what are you trying to say? By that same reasoning, I guess that MVP Steve Nash is one-dimensional because before he became a Maverick, he just passed the ball. The Clippers let Richardson go not because he didn’t play defense because he did but because Bobby Simmons became relevant and offered a cheaper alternative to a penny pinching team. With the Suns, they actually believed they would have kept Joe Johnson and thought Kurt Thomas would be the missing piece to a championship which he was not. Richardson’s back also played a role in them moving him.*


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: This is the fantasy league board?*



alphaorange said:


> Like there is ANY chance of that scenario happening. Plus you just gave away the KNick future for the next 10 years. No cap space, no youth of consequence, no picks. Doesn't get much worse than that. All for the CHANCE that the gutted team left can win a title. Fat chance.


First, you complain about how Isiah has assembled a poor future for us and now trading that away for a shot at a title is objectable. Is there any consistency in your argument?

Also, I'm not to sure how there won't be any picks in our future because we never traded them away; they'll still be there. Financially speaking, we could have pretty much everyone on the team walk in about 3 years time, so what are you talking about having no cap space?

My proposed trade takes alot from our team in particular but we get just as much. We'd have a solid 10 man rotation which is the key to winning in this league anyway. We could supplement the team with our mid-level exception to make sure not to put to much pressure on those 10 players. Bonzi Wells will be available as will Matt Barnes, James Posey, Desmond Mason, etc. All of those players will be attainable with the MLE so why not do the deal considering the quality talent that could fill those vacant spots as in the SF spot?


Starters:
Stephon Marbury...PG
Quentin Richardson...SG
Matt Barnes/James Posey/Desmond Mason/Bonzi Wells...SF
Kevin Garnett...PF
Eddy Curry...C

Bench:
Mardy Collins...G/F
Jamal Crawford...G
Ronaldo Balkman...F
Vladimir Radmanovic...F
Jason Collins...C
Troy Hudson...PG

...I don't think that's a bad fielded team at all and more than the Heat had going into their first season with Shaq. Because of Garnett's health and age, we very well may have a large window to win a title and possibly win multiple titles.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

www.starbury.com said:


> knicks trade
> 
> JEFFRIES
> CRAWFORD
> ...


I'm not sure how essentially Crawford for O'neal and a first round pick last year that has shown promise, is a fair trade.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

> knicks trade
> 
> JEFFRIES
> CRAWFORD
> ...


Lol! :lol: 

How about we trade a bag of chips and a coke for D-wade? Thats more likely then the idea of JC for O'neal.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

you cant be serious with that suns proposal, marcus banks and 2 first rounders including a top 5 for frye, robinson and a late 1st rounder?!?!??! nate would not crack the rotation just like banks sits the whole game with barbosa coming off the bench.

29 and 23rd are almost a wash, and whoever Phoenix can get at 4 will likely have more potential and talent than channing frye anyway.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

knickstorm said:


> you cant be serious with that suns proposal, marcus banks and 2 first rounders including a top 5 for frye, robinson and a late 1st rounder?!?!??! nate would not crack the rotation just like banks sits the whole game with barbosa coming off the bench.
> 
> 29 and 23rd are almost a wash, and whoever Phoenix can get at 4 will likely have more potential and talent than channing frye anyway.


The reason the Suns should not really want the 4th pick in the draft is for the exact same reasons you just mentioned. They are a title contending team and have no room for the contributions of a player that good. Usually those guys, especially in the league now, are guys prepared to contribute to a team. No rookie will really make a dramatic difference for a title contender especially one with the needs of the Suns; Darko Milicic anyone? What the Suns need are players who can contribute to what they already have and make them that more likely to win a title. Guys like Channing Frye and Nate Robinson fit the bill because they both fulfill needs of the Suns. The Suns have been in the market for a backup PG and why they signed Marcus Banks in the first place; but he has not worked out for them. The Suns have also discussed moving Amare back to the 4 as a way of preserving his career longer; Amare has also expressed a desire to move back to the 4. This is where the interest in Frye would come in. Both those guys would make immediate contributions for the same price of a Marcus Banks. In essence, they'd give them greater production while saving the main players of the Suns attack and keep them from paying luxury tax.


Role players are what the Suns need and precisely why they have not been targeting the superstars of the league when they have become available. You have never heard them in rumors involving the likes of guys who have been moved like Vince Carter, Baron Davis, Allen Iverson and never been involved with the guys who supposedly are available like Kevin Garnett and Jermaine O'neal. You do hear them in the sweepstakes for guys like Raja Bell, Jumaine Jones, Boris Diaw, Marcus Banks, etc.



P.S., them giving up the 29th pick is a mute point because they move up in the draft by taking our 23rd pick. That gives me the possibility of landing two solid players who are likely to be seniors and allow them to develop into roles as role players.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: This is the fantasy league board?*



TwinkieFoot said:


> First, you complain about how Isiah has assembled a poor future for us and now trading that away for a shot at a title is objectable. Is there any consistency in your argument?
> 
> Also, I'm not to sure how there won't be any picks in our future because we never traded them away; they'll still be there. Financially speaking, we could have pretty much everyone on the team walk in about 3 years time, so what are you talking about having no cap space?
> 
> ...



Of possibly Matt Barnes, James Posey, Desmond Mason and Bonzi Wells, what SF do you believe would make the most difference for us with the supposed team assembled through these trades? Personally, I'm not sure what we should be looking for at that 3 spot besides a guy who doesn't need the ball and can play defense. As ridiculous as this may sound, that position would be crucial in our success down the road.

Matt Barnes has gotten the opportunity to showcase his skills and made the most of it. I like his ability to contribute in several different fashions to the game, whether it be on the defensive end, shooting the ball, moving the ball or finding the open man. He's a lengthy guy but I don't think he possess' particularly quick lateral quickness.

A laterally quick defender is important to me because we already have Richardson whose a solid physical defender but not particularly effective against players that can take you to the basket. This is why I would consider Desmond Mason but outside of his defense, I do not believe he'd contribute very much. He's still a raw player that doesn't add very many dimensions to a game from a role player stand point.

This is why I thought about Bonzi Wells for a minute but he is without a doubt a cancer that also happens to need the ball to be effective. With Marbury, Garnett, Curry, and Richardson starting, I do not believe we'd need any more scorers. Take away his scoring and I'm not sure Wells' defense and attitude is worth it all. He also lacks very much range which might force a guy like Garnett to play further away from the basket and possibly cripple Curry's post game in the process.

Which brings me to James Posey. I think Posey might be the most logical fit for us with this lineup because he has championship experience as a starter and as a role player. He brings defense, rebounding, range (surprisingly) and the kind of hustle and aggression we'd need. He'd also be within the price range of our Mid Level Exception where as a guy like Matt Barnes may not be given his recent performance in the playoffs. My only concern with Posey is his age. He seems to be slowing down and is only 30, so I'd be hesitant to invest in him when we need him to be what has come to be known as his normal self. I don't have as much confidence in his defensive ability as I once did but I think he'd be the best option for us at the 3 spot. 

My question is though, what do you guys think about who would be the best fit for us and then tell me who would be the most logical, if this team was assembled?


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The reason the Suns should not really want the 4th pick in the draft is for the exact same reasons you just mentioned. They are a title contending team and have no room for the contributions of a player that good. Usually those guys, especially in the league now, are guys prepared to contribute to a team. No rookie will really make a dramatic difference for a title contender especially one with the needs of the Suns; Darko Milicic anyone? What the Suns need are players who can contribute to what they already have and make them that more likely to win a title. Guys like Channing Frye and Nate Robinson fit the bill because they both fulfill needs of the Suns. The Suns have been in the market for a backup PG and why they signed Marcus Banks in the first place; but he has not worked out for them. The Suns have also discussed moving Amare back to the 4 as a way of preserving his career longer; Amare has also expressed a desire to move back to the 4. This is where the interest in Frye would come in. Both those guys would make immediate contributions for the same price of a Marcus Banks. In essence, they'd give them greater production while saving the main players of the Suns attack and keep them from paying luxury tax.
> 
> 
> Role players are what the Suns need and precisely why they have not been targeting the superstars of the league when they have become available. You have never heard them in rumors involving the likes of guys who have been moved like Vince Carter, Baron Davis, Allen Iverson and never been involved with the guys who supposedly are available like Kevin Garnett and Jermaine O'neal. You do hear them in the sweepstakes for guys like Raja Bell, Jumaine Jones, Boris Diaw, Marcus Banks, etc.
> ...


YOu bring up Darko, what about melo, bosh wade? If they need a backup pg they'd much rather draft conley at 4 than make a trade to get Nate Robinson. Even if they dont want the pick, they can do a lot better than what the knicks have to offer. They dont target superstars because they dont need to, they're winning. I dont see the spurs targeting superstars either, or the JAzz, etc. but give them a lottery pick, they'll take it.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

knickstorm said:


> YOu bring up Darko, what about melo, bosh wade? If they need a backup pg they'd much rather draft conley at 4 than make a trade to get Nate Robinson. Even if they dont want the pick, they can do a lot better than what the knicks have to offer. They dont target superstars because they dont need to, they're winning. I dont see the spurs targeting superstars either, or the JAzz, etc. but give them a lottery pick, they'll take it.


Right but even if the Pistons selected a Melo, Bosh or Wade, would they really have gotten time on a team with already established starters poised to win a title? I don't think so and I doubt they'd have the name they currently do now, on the Pistons. Conley may be an excellent player but will he, with his inexperience, be able to mean much to a team poised to win the title? While he see any time during these immediate years? It's doubtful and if the Suns fail to win a title and their players start to decline, by the time they disband their team and look to gain cap space, a guy like Conley will already be a free agent. Why not put most of your eggs into one basket, try to win the title now and then worry about acquiring a guy like Conley down the line?

If they don't want the pick, what is out there that is so much better than what the Knicks have to offer because I'm very interested. You just said it yourself when you agreed with me that contenders don't really look into targeting superstars. So essentially, your telling me that they'd be targeting a role player for that same no.4 pick. What role player out there would be more of a better investment that Frye and Robinson. I mean, Frye excelled last year in a system that suited his game. If he goes to the Suns and gets all those touches he's expected to get, he will be a pretty solid player for them. Robinson is a dynamite guard that can explode for points at will, another trait that fits well into the Suns system. There is not anything better they can get out there for that price, other than Frye and Robinson.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Right but even if the Pistons selected a Melo, Bosh or Wade, would they really have gotten time on a team with already established starters poised to win a title?


by the end of the rookie season all 3 players were already better than anyone on the pistons roster....(except for maybe billups)


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

knickstorm said:


> YOu bring up Darko, what about melo, bosh wade? If they need a backup pg they'd much rather draft conley at 4 than make a trade to get Nate Robinson. Even if they dont want the pick, they can do a lot better than what the knicks have to offer. They dont target superstars because they dont need to, they're winning. I dont see the spurs targeting superstars either, or the JAzz, etc. but give them a lottery pick, they'll take it.



If the Pistons selected Melo, Bosh or Wade, would they have gotten time anyway? Looking at that Pistons roster, I'm not sure there were any positions available where the Pistons would have sacrificed a chance to win a title (the main agenda of all teams at some point) to develop these players. Knowing how loaded the Suns are, do you really think they'd do the same? Their franchise player, Steve Nash is 33 years old and does not have many years of this level of play left. They are going to do what is necessary to surround him with the talent capable of winning that title because the opportunity to do so does not come along very often. Looking back on things, this may be the first opportunity since Charles Barkley's Suns in '93 had a realistic chance of winning a title. You think they'd be willing to sit around another 13 years for another opportunity? There is a distinct reason why they have not been drafting or signing young/potential based players and that is because those kind of players can not contribute to what they hope to do. That no.4 pick will not help them, so why would they keep it? If they want Conley, they can still incorporate him into their plans if their strive for a title fails via free agency. By that time, the Suns should be far enough below the cap to begin revamping there team with the same young players in this years draft. A good one of increasing the likelihood of that happening is to bring in players like Frye and Robinson, who can contribute both now and in the future.

Who out there honestly has a better package to offer? Frye and Robinson (for all his problems) yield alot of production at a combined $3 million per year price tag and can do much more in an uptempo system. Besides, you said it yourself, the Suns are not looking for superstars. If they are not looking for superstars, then who are they looking for? Glue guys and complementary players which are what Robinson and Frye exactly are. That statement of yours actually strengthened my argument.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> by the end of the rookie season all 3 players were already better than anyone on the pistons roster....(except for maybe billups)


Would that have been the case had those 3 players been playing for the Pistons? Think about it, if they would have gotten time they would have gotten time as role players. Not having the leeway to be much more than that, would they have been able to realize their potential as quickly as they have? I highly doubt it. I mean, look at Jermaine O'Neal on the Blazers. He ALMOST immediately became a quasi 20 and 10 big man after the trade and developed into an all-star instanteously. His main problem was that he had Brian Grant, Rasheed Wallace and Ardonis Sabonis ahead of him who prevented him from being much more than a backup. The Blazers like the Pistons and now the Suns, had a title on the mind however. This is why the Suns most likely would not be interested in that kind of pick anyway.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

ChosenFEW said:


> by the end of the rookie season all 3 players were already better than anyone on the pistons roster....(except for maybe billups)


All three players would've found away to MESH with Billups, RIP, Prince, and BIG-BEN. If Pistons would've Drafted Bosh there never would've been a Rasheed Wallace trade to the Pistons. Drafting Wade would've gave the Pistons a Backup for Billups, RIP, and Prince, plus the 6th-man of the year. Drafting Carmelo would've made the Pistons able to play BIG lineups and small lineups at top speed.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*Wazup Twinkie, are you serious with this statement: 

How is Curry a big mistake? You often cry about Curry being a mistake but hardly give any relevant reasons why. What even irks me more is the fact that you seldom listen to other opinions than your own. *

Coach Isiah Thomas sacrifice the entire Knick Team and its players this season by giving Eddy Curry 30 MPG this season. 
At the time of the Eddy Curry trade during the start of Preseason the Knicks roster did not need Curry or Davis. The Knicks needed a DEFENSIVE-SYSTEM-Playbook. 
Curry leads the league in TURNOVERS, plus he has NO passing game because his Court Awareness of his Teammates is worst than a High School Freshman tryouts. 

*Twinkie are you serious with this lineup too: 
Starters:
Stephon Marbury...PG
Quentin Richardson...SG
Matt Barnes/James Posey/Desmond Mason/Bonzi Wells...SF
Kevin Garnett...PF
Eddy Curry...C*

As long as you keep getting your ideas from other Knick-Fans who actually think that Players like Q.Richardson can play the SG-Position without any kind of Ball-Handle and decent passing abilities plus he have a back condition, that is your choice of doing. Q.Richardson showed everyone at the start of this past season that the best position for him is just at the SF position (The Knicks only WON 23 games with Q.Rich at the SG-Position). 

*Twinkie, how long have you been watching the NBA? to make a defending statement about ONE-DIMENSIONAL Players Marbury, Francis, Q.Rich, and Curry: 

You need to watch the game more often because Marbury is far from a one-dimensional player, same as Francis and Richardson. Marbury, Richardson and Francis score in several different sets but Marbury and Francis also create opportunities for teammates and Richardson plays solid defense on the other end of the floor. Those are two definite ways that these guys change the game and how they have warranted all-star considerations in the past. Your just wrong on this critique. *

Marbury never played any DEFENSE in High School, I'm from Brooklyn, and we are proud of Marbury success in the NBA, but we will not LIE and say Marbury has Defense in his B-Ball talent. 
All I have to say about Francis is Defensive Coach Jeff Van Gundy did'nt apporove of him. 
And Crawford is a Joke on Defense. 
The only season Marbury, francis, and Q.Rich played any decent defense was this past season but DEFENSE is Hustle-ENERGY inwhich these players are not consistent with on the defensive end of the court.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> All three players would've found away to MESH with Billups, RIP, Prince, and BIG-BEN. If Pistons would've Drafted Bosh there never would've been a Rasheed Wallace trade to the Pistons. Drafting Wade would've gave the Pistons a Backup for Billups, RIP, and Prince, plus the 6th-man of the year. Drafting Carmelo would've made the Pistons able to play BIG lineups and small lineups at top speed.


Both Carlisle and Larry Brown enforced a system where there was an equal amount of touches on the offensive end of the floor. All 3 of the aforementioned players were the focal points of their teams offense attack. I find it hard to believe they would have found a way to MESH and be who they are now especially when the Pistons had several capable veterans on the team to take minutes away from them. 


Chris Bosh being one of the go to guys on the Raptors when he was first drafted averaged just 12ppg, 7.4rpg in 34 mpg. That was hardly good enough to cut it on a team that was in a position to win a title. Wade likely would not have gotten very many minute on the Pistons either with Brown favoring Billups, James, Hunter and Hamilton at the guard positions. Hell, Larry Brown opted to play Malik Rose ahead of David Lee on the Knicks so who tells you that Wade would have been any different when his competition was actually all-star level? As for Anthony, him not playing defense early on sure would have tweaked Brown and kept him on the bench. I doubt the Pistons would play small ball since Larry has never favored running the ball which is a must when you play small. It's just unlikely these guys would have done anything with the Pistons and its unlikely lottery picks in general would get the just amount of minutes on a title contender.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> *Wazup Twinkie, are you serious with this statement:
> 
> How is Curry a big mistake? You often cry about Curry being a mistake but hardly give any relevant reasons why. What even irks me more is the fact that you seldom listen to other opinions than your own. *
> 
> ...


I am very serious with this statement because I don't understand your stance at all. You complain about Isiah essentially building around Curry but can not figure out what is the problem considering that Curry is our franchise player for the future. That is what teams do when they find a player to build around.

I also don't understand your statement that the Knicks roster did not need Curry or Davis. When the trade was originally made for both players, Jerome James was the only center capable player on our team. At that time, Frye was a little to young and not developed physically to handle the responsibilities full time. Prior to that year, we had Kurt Thomas playing the 5 at 6"9' and Maurice Taylor backing him up at 6"10' which made for the shortest front court in the league.

Curry may not be an adept passer but that is why you develop players. He's 24 years old and has alot more room for growth so I don't understand why people like yourself think him to be a completed product. If he was as bad as you say, he would not have even been in the league right now so cut out the belly-aching.

And the comments keep coming. I may understand your reasoning that Richardson might be at his best at the 3 position but certainly not for the reasons you mentioned. Ball handling or passing is not a prerequiste to play the 2 position because if it was guys like Jason Richardson and a host of other 2 guards would not be in the league right now. I think you must have mistake a 2 guard for an actual PG because ball handling and passing is only critical if your running an offense. As for the reason why I believe Richardson might be best at the 3 position, he possess' a dynamic scoring game that would best be utilized at that position. Richardson also is an excellent defender but more of a physical defender than a finesse defender. At the 2 position you find more finesse scorers so it's only natural to have him guard 3's. In either case, this won't be a problem since James Posey is a combination of a finesse and physical defender capable of guarding 2's. Richardson can't be that bad a player when he averaged 13ppg and 7rpg on 42% shooting, 38% shooting beyond the arch while being injuried during the season. We don't need all-star play out of him when we'd already have 3 established stars in Garnett, Curry and Marbury. By the way, the Knicks won 23 games with Malik Rose starting at the 3 spot a good portion of the season along with Antonio Davis at the 4 spot. It's stupid to say that Richardson was the only reason or sole reason for that season when so many factors contributed to it.

I also want you to pin point the exact sentence when I said that Marbury was a defender. I bet you'd have a hard time finding it because I never said it. All I said was that Marbury was not one dimensional because was able to change the game in several fashions on the basketball floor. He is a dynamic scorer and has the ability to find his teammates shots. One dimensional refers to guys like Steve Kerr and even Eddy Curry who really can not change the game if they are not doing one thing. For that same reason, Francis is not one dimensional and definately not Richardson who is also a dynamic scorer and plays defense on the other end of the floor. I also never mentioned anything about Crawford.

P.S., I think I know something about Marbury's game since he grew up only 5 blocks away from me and actually played pick up games with my brother and his friends. I guess your not the only one.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Right but even if the Pistons selected a Melo, Bosh or Wade, would they really have gotten time on a team with already established starters poised to win a title? I don't think so and I doubt they'd have the name they currently do now, on the Pistons. Conley may be an excellent player but will he, with his inexperience, be able to mean much to a team poised to win the title? While he see any time during these immediate years? It's doubtful and if the Suns fail to win a title and their players start to decline, by the time they disband their team and look to gain cap space, a guy like Conley will already be a free agent. Why not put most of your eggs into one basket, try to win the title now and then worry about acquiring a guy like Conley down the line?
> 
> If they don't want the pick, what is out there that is so much better than what the Knicks have to offer because I'm very interested. You just said it yourself when you agreed with me that contenders don't really look into targeting superstars. So essentially, your telling me that they'd be targeting a role player for that same no.4 pick. What role player out there would be more of a better investment that Frye and Robinson. I mean, Frye excelled last year in a system that suited his game. If he goes to the Suns and gets all those touches he's expected to get, he will be a pretty solid player for them. Robinson is a dynamite guard that can explode for points at will, another trait that fits well into the Suns system. There is not anything better they can get out there for that price, other than Frye and Robinson.


Agreed that conley might not be the piece that helps phoenix win the title (should they lose this year). But there is no way you can tell me NAte Freaking Robinson and CHanning Frye is the guy who will make or break your title chances. There are role players like Shane Battier, and Robert Horry (moreso in the past) who have a huge impact on the game, and then there are the lesser role players.

THere might not be much out there, but there is no way you trade your 4th overall pick, especially in a draft as deep as this for a role player. If anything, you package your 2 late first round picks which phoneix has for a role player. Personally if the Suns lose this year i dont think it'll be due to personnel so if i'm the gm, there isn't a reason to trade the pick for role players to begin with. I see no reason why the suns cant go for a Conley, Horford, Yi, etc and develop them as the season goes along. Plus players ie Jeff Green, Corey Brewer would fit great on the team. Imagine Brewer and Bell playing D on the perimeter, my goodness. If i thought frye and robinson would put phoenix over the top i'd say you got a good deal, but i just dont see the two dramatically increasing the suns' chances of winning it all.

But of course all this depends on where the lottery balls fall, Phoenix might not even get the pick, and if they do, it might not necessarily be #4


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Wow, twink...just wow*

1) I never said IT gave us no future. In fact, at this time we have a great future because of our youth and talent.
2) Curry's flaw's have been well documented by both myself and Kiyaman many times. How many different ways do you want us to say he is a VERY one dimensional player with flaws that actually HURT the team.
3) The fact that IT has chosen to make Curry his centerpiece doesn't mean I ( or anyone else) has to agree with it. I see it it as a matter of necessity at this time. Where else is he going to turn? If he manages to secure, say Garnett (which should take less than you propose), Curry becomes the #2 from day one.
4) We did not need Curry. Frye would have been given all the minutes he could take and would be more developed as a player by getting more attention from the staff that Curry now gets. We would be going into his 3rd year with him being 15-20 pounds stronger and experienced. We would also have had an additional lotto pick last year and a lotto pick this year instead of #23 or whatever. Getting Curry did nothing for us for 2 years and it remains to be seen if he takes us anywhere next.
5) The problem with your patchwork lineups is that everyone is filling gaps in everyone else's game. That is NOT how good teams are built. No team still in the playoffs has as many individual weakness as the Knicks would have under your plan. If you are not relatively well-rounded, you get ousted early.
6) If you think your plan doesn't mortgage the future, you have not been paying attention the last 5-6 years. Having 1st rounders doesn't mean squat if you need an impact player and are drafting outside the lotto...which is what would happen as the team decays. If you think that everyones salaries are going to remain to expire at the same time, you are delusional. Plus, the young guys will be getting raises.
7) I have talked with someone high up in the Piston org many times and I can tell you for a fact they loved all the guys you claim would not have meshed. They (like most other teams) just felt that Darko was going to be a star at center, and as everyone knows, great well-rounded centers are hard to find. He may still get there.
8) The league wide whispers are that the Suns may make MAJOR changes if they are unsuccessful getting to the finals. I doubt that would mean securing role players. If they are successful? Who knows. First things, first.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

knickstorm said:


> Agreed that conley might not be the piece that helps phoenix win the title (should they lose this year). But there is no way you can tell me NAte Freaking Robinson and CHanning Frye is the guy who will make or break your title chances. There are role players like Shane Battier, and Robert Horry (moreso in the past) who have a huge impact on the game, and then there are the lesser role players.
> 
> THere might not be much out there, but there is no way you trade your 4th overall pick, especially in a draft as deep as this for a role player. If anything, you package your 2 late first round picks which phoneix has for a role player. Personally if the Suns lose this year i dont think it'll be due to personnel so if i'm the gm, there isn't a reason to trade the pick for role players to begin with. I see no reason why the suns cant go for a Conley, Horford, Yi, etc and develop them as the season goes along. Plus players ie Jeff Green, Corey Brewer would fit great on the team. Imagine Brewer and Bell playing D on the perimeter, my goodness. If i thought frye and robinson would put phoenix over the top i'd say you got a good deal, but i just dont see the two dramatically increasing the suns' chances of winning it all.
> 
> But of course all this depends on where the lottery balls fall, Phoenix might not even get the pick, and if they do, it might not necessarily be #4


I honestly do not believe you read the posts that followed the one I responded too about yours. Channing Frye and Nate Robinson would help save the Suns starters who are logging a ridiculous amount of minutes heading into the playoffs. Amare with that knee of his (an indication of the stress that was put on his body), Marion at 30 and Nash at 33, need players who can play meaningful minutes so they don't always have to. Frye can and will play the 5. That saves Amare from alot of the physical play he gets on the defensive end of the floor and also moves a 6-7 Marion back to his natural position. Just last year before Frye's sophomore slump, he approached 20 and 8 before that injury sidelined him for the year. An excellent passing PG like Nash and a system that favors offensive talent should revatilize Frye's game and improve it significantly. Nate Robinson can go off for 25 and above if he gets the ball. You might not necessarily trust him to run the offense but he does give the Suns some offensive punch off the bench and you can just have Barbosa or Diaw handle the ball.

As I also mentioned before, refer back to the Pistons and what they did with the no.2 pick as contenders. Also refer back to my Jermaine O'neal reference of how he was ready to play all-star caliber ball with the Blazers but never got the chance until he went to the Blazers. That situation wouldn't be any different on the Suns where you have 7 or more established players who won't be taking a back seat to this player.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Wow, twink...just wow*



alphaorange said:


> 1) I never said IT gave us no future. In fact, at this time we have a great future because of our youth and talent.
> 2) Curry's flaw's have been well documented by both myself and Kiyaman many times. How many different ways do you want us to say he is a VERY one dimensional player with flaws that actually HURT the team.
> 3) The fact that IT has chosen to make Curry his centerpiece doesn't mean I ( or anyone else) has to agree with it. I see it it as a matter of necessity at this time. Where else is he going to turn? If he manages to secure, say Garnett (which should take less than you propose), Curry becomes the #2 from day one.
> 4) We did not need Curry. Frye would have been given all the minutes he could take and would be more developed as a player by getting more attention from the staff that Curry now gets. We would be going into his 3rd year with him being 15-20 pounds stronger and experienced. We would also have had an additional lotto pick last year and a lotto pick this year instead of #23 or whatever. Getting Curry did nothing for us for 2 years and it remains to be seen if he takes us anywhere next.
> ...


1.) You must seem to have a short term memory because this isn't the first time you "forgot" comments you made earlier. You regularly bash Isiah the GM on the regular which suggests to me that your not happy with what he's doing with the player personnel.

2.) You've mentioned Curry's flaws several different times but at least Kiyaman has never directly responded to argument made by people like myself that is essentially based on the fact that Curry at 24 years old is not a completed project. You on the other hand can't seem to fathom this is the case when no one would judge any other 24 year old as a completed project but I guess that just makes you special.

3.) Curry is not the centerpiece of our team by necessity because if that were he case, Isiah would have went with an already better player like Stephon Marbury. I think if we do bring in Garnett to the Knicks, I think Isiah still may keep Curry as the center focus of the offense since guys like Garnett can do so many things on the floor and Curry still is the future. I don't think we give up too much for Garnett in my suggested trade because we also get alot in return like a solid 10 man rotation and shorter length contracts.

4.) Curry established himself as possibly the most effective low post center in the league. How exactly is that nothing? The rest of his game has yet to be seen but would Frye have become that effective a player in the post? I doubt it and I doubt Frye would have done any one thing exceptionally well like Curry. I think you kind of strengthened my argument that Curry is not the centerpiece of the team by default but because of talent. Why else would the Knicks decide to build around him if Frye was capable of what you said?

5.) Time-out. Every championship contender has certain flaws. The Spurs don't hit free throws, the Suns don't play particularly good defense, the Heat play spotty defense, the Mavericks are still a jump shooting team, etc. With that roster we'd end up with, I think we'd be a hell of alot more complete. We'd have a core of Marbury, Garnett and Curry with solid two way players like James Posey and Quentin Richardson. We'd have a 6th man of the year candidate in Crawford, defenders and hustle players like Mardy Collins, Ronaldo Balkman and Jason Collins and a 3 point threat in Radmanovic that started for the Clippers last year. What about that suggests "patch work?"

6.) Stephon Marbury and Kevin Garnett's contract expire after the 2008-2009 season after paying each about $50 million for the season. Jason Collins $6 million conract expires during that same time bringing the total up to $56 million as will Posey's contract most likely. Quentin Richardson's, and Troy Hudson's contracts topping out about $15 million expire the following year. Considering that within a relatively short amount of time, the Knicks will be free of $71 million not yet including Posey's contract. We don't have to worry about resigning the young guys because we don't have any young guys to really resign besides Balkman and Collins who will be free agents when Richardson and Hudson's contract expire. By the way, after that experiment is done, we can rebuild by looking to sign free agents like LeBron James, Chris Bosh or Carmelo Anthony or going a more realistic route and sign players to compliment the team's franchise player, Eddy Curry. During that time we'd already have selected 3-4 first round players and we've seen how solid a job Isiah has done doing so with Mardy Collins, Ronaldo Balkman, Nate Robinson, David Lee, etc. They mean squat especially considering you just said that your happy with the young players Isiah brought in; unless of course your lieing.

7.)So what did that conversation prove with these Piston higher ups? All it showed was that they could not give a talented player the opportunity to succeed.

8.)Maybe maybe not. The Suns have been very close to getting to the Finals recently so that suggests to me it isn't the core that has issues. We'll see what they'll do down the road but a starting center like Channing Frye would help them.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*one by one....*

1) you're a liar. Show me where I said IT is a lousy GM.
2)Curry may or may not be a finished product. There is nothing to suggest he will make major improvements. History is in my corner, not yours. As I posted before....show me an example. His boarding is unchanged since day one. So is his defense. So is his passing. He was absolutely a wreck when the doubles and triples came more aggressively. These are FACTS.
3) Marbury is too old to build a team around. Besides, that was ITs first effort and it failed.
4) Regardless of Curry's low post scoring, which I have always acknowledged, the team was NEVER very good. I am speaking about results, which is all that matters. I can hear the "qualifiers" coming already...injuries....blah, blah, blah. The team stunk it up again this year. This means he gave us nothing, as far as great results. To say Frye wouldn't have made the team just as good is speculation. If your belief is different, good for you, that's your right. Just don't spin it as fact.
5)First, the Suns DO play defense. Either you don't watch, or the game is beyond you. I suggest listening to "pops" presser after the game. It may enlighten you. Second, there is a HUGE difference between having some imperfections and having a team FULL of imperfect, incomplete players including the "centerpiece". Show me a team still playing that is flawed in a big way. Real stuff, not like the crap you just spewed forth.
6)What about re-signing the players that will still be here? What about contract extensions? You make a lot of unfounded assumptions. No reality in your logic.
7) What the conversation proved is that they weren't trying to get a player that would be a role player. They went with who they thought was the most talented and would be the better player. For the record...'melo was the next choice.
7)What I posted was NBA "insider" talk (I am not privy to it, myself), however, it is apparently widely accepted as real. I have no way of knowing what that would mean. Give that Marion will be 31 next year and Nash is even older, It could mean a complete overhaul and the SUns have the picks and trade assets to do it in short order...especially if this draft proves as deep as everyone seems to think. I am unconvinced.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: When will the lies stop....*



alphaorange said:


> 1) you're a liar. Show me where I said IT is a lousy GM.
> 2)Curry may or may not be a finished product. There is nothing to suggest he will make major improvements. History is in my corner, not yours. As I posted before....show me an example. His boarding is unchanged since day one. So is his defense. So is his passing. He was absolutely a wreck when the doubles and triples came more aggressively. These are FACTS.
> 3) Marbury is too old to build a team around. Besides, that was ITs first effort and it failed.
> 4) Regardless of Curry's low post scoring, which I have always acknowledged, the team was NEVER very good. I am speaking about results, which is all that matters. I can hear the "qualifiers" coming already...injuries....blah, blah, blah. The team stunk it up again this year. This means he gave us nothing, as far as great results. To say Frye wouldn't have made the team just as good is speculation. If your belief is different, good for you, that's your right. Just don't spin it as fact.
> ...


1.) Your a liar. You consistently comment about how poor a team the Knicks are which is an obvious reflection of how you poor a job you feel Isiah has done. You've been a pessimist of the Knicks as long as I've been on this board. You've also had a poor memory from what I've noticed since I been on this board because I called you out on 2 occassions where you did not seem to recollect two conflicting points you've had.

2.) History does not mean **** in this situation because it is not an accurate reflection of high school players and what they can do. The influx of high school players is something that is fairly recent and most have are not old enough to accurately judge their careers. In other words, we really don't know what to expect from Curry but at the same time, that does not also mean that he can't make major improvements. This is why reasoning is more important than necessarily stats or history. There's your example.

3.)Marbury has been apart of the Knicks for about 3 years and a half already. If Isiah had not started adding these young players, the Knicks probably would be in the playoffs already but thought we'd have more success rebuilding. Steve Nash had a team built around him at about 31 years old so I doubt that the Marbury being too old excuse is valid.

4.) To say that Frye would have made the team good is just speculation as well making this whole argument invalid. The Knicks may have not been very good with Curry but at the same time we are a very young team learning how to win. These things take time and don't happen over night. Once we collective realize how too play as a team, we'll be fine. As of right now, we got to measure these players as individuals because that is what they are and what they'll likely resemble in the future. From the looks of it, Curry being one of the most unstoppable post presences in the league is a hell of a start to first develop on.

5.) Judging from the number of points and the shooting percentages the Suns give up, I do not believe they are a good defensive team. Hopefully NBA.com may enlighten you with that. In response too all teams being flawed, the Warriors as of yesterday were still playing and they were hugely flawed as a team. They lacked rebounding, they lacked shot blocking, they did a poor job of limiting the Jazz's rebounding, their defense wasn't effective, they lacked a post presence, they lacked players capable of defending a post presence, etc. They still managed to get to the second round and still managed to effectively challenge the Jazz in every game. The Warriors are probably the prime example but certainly not the last.

6.) People like you and Kitty are such a big fan of rebuilding that freeing up all that money at once should be a dream for you guys. I guess because you live on this message board to disagree with me, you do not see these possibilities. Anyway, we'd already have Mardy Collins and Ronaldo Balkman who by that time should be ready to start. We should resign them but that likely won't cost very much and will see even more cap relief in the future from the remaining contracts that I mentioned. That should give us the opportunity to begin signinging players the Knicks would want. The logic is sound proof if you just look at the contracts.

7.) Once again, the argument just proved that the Pistons could not successfully develop a player that most GM's ranked top 2 because they were more interested in the present than future. The same problems had arose with previous teams such as the Blazers and will likely arise for the Suns. They should give up the pick.

8.) Considering how close the Suns have been to making the Finals and likely winning the title at this point, I doubt they'd overhaul the team until it showed signs of slowing down. Right now, I do not believe they have been better or realistically closer to that goal. It's unlikely they'll scrap the entire roster just like that to eventually try do it all over to get back to the same point.


----------

