# Knicks Putting Full Court Press on Kobe



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

> Stars earn stripes
> Unselfish U.S. team goes unbeaten in Vegas to claim Olympic bid, restore some pride
> Sam Smith
> On Pro Basketball
> ...


I'm glad to hear we are still pursing Kobe. His game could easily turn this team into title contenders. Hopefully we could expand the deal to include Vladimir Radmanovic for financial purposes (benefiting the Lakers) and Lamar Odom. I don't see any reason why the Lakers would keep those players with Kobe gone and believe we can compensate the Lakers well for those three players. I'd like to look into arranging a way to bring Derek Fisher here as well but that would be tricky with his contract situation as a new signee. Odom and Bryant would be more than enough to help us make some noise in the East, however.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Why would we want Lamar Odom? Radmanovic, ok, as long as we don't give up anything important for him. But Odom is not a player you want to bring to NY.

It's been proven that Odom is a talent who just doesn't have the heart and can't put it together. Even when he had the opportunity to be the clear cut man of the team he disappeared in the playoffs.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Tragedy said:


> Why would we want Lamar Odom? Radmanovic, ok, as long as we don't give up anything important for him. But Odom is not a player you want to bring to NY.
> 
> It's been proven that Odom is a talent who just doesn't have the heart and can't put it together. Even when he had the opportunity to be the clear cut man of the team he disappeared in the playoffs.


I feel your missing the value of having a man like Lamar Odom. Just because he's been a reluctant scorer, does not mean he can not be of real use for the Knicks. Considering we'd have the league leading scorer, Kobe Bryant; the league's leading percentage shooter, Eddy Curry; and one a guy who could go off for 20 any game in Marbury, scoring should be the last thing we'd need. What we need in particular would be a ball mover, which Lamar certainly is. In fact, I believe he can effectively releave Marbury of a majority of his PG duties and allow Marbury to be a bit more of Starbury and alot less of a playmaker. This works especially well for us because it spaces the floor much better for Eddy Curry having a perimeter oriented left handed PF as a starter and gives us the option of running our offense from the post; who knows maybe Eddy might learn a thing or two about passing the ball because it worked with Brad Miller playing next to Chris Webber and Vlade Divac during his early Kings days.

P.S., when has Odom ever been given the opportunity to be the man playing next to D-Wade and Kobe?

I also say we sign Charlie Bell and hope to trade him once he becomes trade eligible for Derek Fisher if their is no possible way we can obtain him immediately.


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

What could the Knicks realistically offer for Kobe, and still remain viable (with him, of course)?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

the knicks really don't have marketable pieces. the 2 guys who have any reasonable value are balkman and lee, and they are only subs. everyone else gets you 50 cents on the $.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

kflo said:


> the knicks really don't have marketable pieces. the 2 guys who have any reasonable value are balkman and lee, and they are only subs. everyone else gets you 50 cents on the $.



*If Isiah gave up David Lee, Balkman, Nate, Crawford, and Malik Rose for Kobe Bryant, then Coach Phil Jackson will go to the second round in the Post Season Games with the youngest crew of players. The Knicks have Maketble trading players however, Kobe Bryant is a NBA Standing-Room Marketable Fan-Player. Kobe probably stack more Fans in a stadium than the Spurs team does.* 

Kobe Bryant would be mad as Fire in New York with only Halfcourt offensive players that give up more points on defense and dont have a running game for a fastbreak Highlight for him. Plus could you see Kobe dumping the ball down low to Eddy Curry every other time down the floor when Curry cant pass it back when doubled teamed. How would Marbury feel about Kobe, Curry, and Zach taking all the shots each game.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

Kiyaman said:


> *If Isiah gave up David Lee, Balkman, Nate, Crawford, and Malik Rose for Kobe Bryant, then Coach Phil Jackson will go to the second round in the Post Season Games with the youngest crew of players. The Knicks have Maketble trading players however, Kobe Bryant is a NBA Standing-Room Marketable Fan-Player. Kobe probably stack more Fans in a stadium than the Spurs team does.*
> 
> Kobe Bryant would be mad as Fire in New York with only Halfcourt offensive players that give up more points on defense and dont have a running game for a fastbreak Highlight for him. Plus could you see Kobe dumping the ball down low to Eddy Curry every other time down the floor when Curry cant pass it back when doubled teamed. How would Marbury feel about Kobe, Curry, and Zach taking all the shots each game.


that trade suggestion is simply absurd. fans typically think they can package 5 players together and think it adds up. it doesn't. you're not providing a single starting building block. throwing in guys like nate and crawford and rose doesn't sweeten the pot, it sours it.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

kflo said:


> the knicks really don't have marketable pieces. the 2 guys who have any reasonable value are balkman and lee, and they are only subs. everyone else gets you 50 cents on the $.


Apparently you missed the Nike commericals that featured Amare Stoudemire and Zach Randolph marketed about a year ago. The fact is that when Randolph is healthy, he is a pretty good player that people will come out to see. In addition to that, they'd have Jamal Crawford who has been a crowd pleaser everywhere he has gone as well as David Lee as you mentioned. Those are 3 players you could start around right there. Besides, there isn't anything more marketable in the league than winning which this team should very well help the Lakers do more of.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> *If Isiah gave up David Lee, Balkman, Nate, Crawford, and Malik Rose for Kobe Bryant, then Coach Phil Jackson will go to the second round in the Post Season Games with the youngest crew of players. The Knicks have Maketble trading players however, Kobe Bryant is a NBA Standing-Room Marketable Fan-Player. Kobe probably stack more Fans in a stadium than the Spurs team does.*
> 
> Kobe Bryant would be mad as Fire in New York with only Halfcourt offensive players that give up more points on defense and dont have a running game for a fastbreak Highlight for him. Plus could you see Kobe dumping the ball down low to Eddy Curry every other time down the floor when Curry cant pass it back when doubled teamed. How would Marbury feel about Kobe, Curry, and Zach taking all the shots each game.


The trio of Marbury, Curry and Zach would not be together if we traded for Kobe because they just so happen to be the 3 best players on our team and the Lakers would need at least one in turn. In my proposed scenario, Zach would be gone but we'd get Odom as well. Odom would be the glue guy because he happens to be a pretty solid ball distributor and could take the pressure of having to look for players out of the hands of those 3. He might even be a helpful tutor to a guy like Curry by giving him the inside edge of passing the ball from within the post.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The trio of Marbury, Curry and Zach would not be together if we traded for Kobe because they just so happen to be the 3 best players on our team and the Lakers would need at least one in turn. In my proposed scenario, Zach would be gone but we'd get Odom as well. Odom would be the glue guy because he happens to be a pretty solid ball distributor and could take the pressure of having to look for players out of the hands of those 3. He might even be a helpful tutor to a guy like Curry by giving him the inside edge of passing the ball from within the post.



Phil Jackson is not going to let Lamar Odom be traded as long as he is the coach. The Lakers signed Phil Jackson Contract not the other way around. 

Lamar Odom showed great leadership on the court with his teammates with Kobe and without Kobe. 

I dont think Phil Jackson would want Curry or Marbury on his roster, maybe Zach, Lee, and Balkman to forfill all his needs in the Frontcourt with Kwame, Bynum, and Odom. But the Lakers and Phil is greedy they will also want one of the Knicks young promising Guards with a future first round draft pick for Kobe Bryant. Mainly because the Knicks gav up two first round draft picks for Eddy Curry, and one first round pick for Marbury. 

The Chicago Bulls Stopped all conversation with the Lakers when they asked for Deng & Niocioni in the same sentence (two double-double players on any given night). 
The best three co-existing players pulled out of the same draft (Deng, Niocioni, and Ben Gordon) that took a decade long Lottery Team (Bulls) to the Postseason games, plus made them a future playoff team each season since their arrival. 
The Knicks would've had a chance to get one of those three players out of the draft if Isiah did not trade that draft pick for Marbury.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Kiyaman said:


> Phil Jackson is not going to let Lamar Odom be traded as long as he is the coach. The Lakers signed Phil Jackson Contract not the other way around.
> 
> Lamar Odom showed great leadership on the court with his teammates with Kobe and without Kobe.
> 
> ...


What evidence do you have that Phil Jackson is so enamored with Lamar Odom. I certainly have not ever heard him object to any of the other trades that Odom was supposedly rumored in during the course of this offseason or prior to the trade deadline last year. 

Also, there have not been any reports I heard of regarding the Lakers really accepting to talk to any teams regarding Kobe. Everything we heard about what other teams would give up has been pure speculation from different columnist, etc. As for what the Bulls have to offer, I have to say I am not that impressed. It doesn't take much to get an Eastern Conference team into the playoffs the past few seasons especially if you've been healthy all season. Something tells me it would be a particularly different ballgame out west if all your relying on would be Deng and Nocioni to be the centerpieces of your team.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

Tragedy said:


> Why would we want Lamar Odom? Radmanovic, ok, as long as we don't give up anything important for him. But Odom is not a player you want to bring to NY.
> 
> It's been proven that Odom is a talent who just doesn't have the heart and can't put it together. Even when he had the opportunity to be the clear cut man of the team he disappeared in the playoffs.


if lamar odom is standing in the way of acquiring kobe, you go and take lamar odom. Personally i really like his game, heart or not he presents tons of matchup problems, is twice the rebounder curry is. This guy gave shawn marion fits......i'd love to have odom on the team.....he'd instantly be the 2nd best passer on the team behind marbury.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Apparently you missed the Nike commericals that featured Amare Stoudemire and Zach Randolph marketed about a year ago. The fact is that when Randolph is healthy, he is a pretty good player that people will come out to see. In addition to that, they'd have Jamal Crawford who has been a crowd pleaser everywhere he has gone as well as David Lee as you mentioned. Those are 3 players you could start around right there. Besides, there isn't anything more marketable in the league than winning which this team should very well help the Lakers do more of.


i meant marketable from a trade standpoint, not a commercial standpoint. zach was just basically given away by portland.

crawford is a guy with limited trade value. lee has some, but mostly as cheap talent with some upside.

no team is going to want to build around that.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The trio of Marbury, Curry and Zach would not be together if we traded for Kobe because they just so happen to be the 3 best players on our team and the Lakers would need at least one in turn. In my proposed scenario, Zach would be gone but we'd get Odom as well. Odom would be the glue guy because he happens to be a pretty solid ball distributor and could take the pressure of having to look for players out of the hands of those 3. He might even be a helpful tutor to a guy like Curry by giving him the inside edge of passing the ball from within the post.


again, it's simply absurd to think that the knicks could end up with odom and kobe. nobody wants the knicks players, unless it's at bargain prices.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I don't really want Kobe*

unless we can get him on the cheap. He doesn't make us good enough to get a title if we give up what everyone thinks we have to give up. He'll be great for another few years and then start his decline. Marbury is gone in two. What does that leave us for young talent and future picks? Marbury, Kobe, and Curry, plus Zach is not going to beat the Spurs, the Mavs, or the Suns anytime in the next three. Prolly not the Pistons, the Bulls, or the Cavs, either. So whats the point? I'll keep what we have, see what we have for this years picks, see how Randolph plays defense and hustles, and go from there. Kobe's great but what is he..30..31? We still owe the Suns a first so we are already down a pick.

Curry needs work but is a keeper at this point
Zach...We'll see
Qrich if healthy is a great addition at SF, SF, SF
Marbury had a great year and is a keeper until he leaves
2 guard....IMO is the real key. 45% and strong defense makes us very tough. Is is JC? Dnic? We'll see.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

kflo said:


> again, it's simply absurd to think that the knicks could end up with odom and kobe. nobody wants the knicks players, unless it's at bargain prices.



You should catch a Knick game sometime. I find it funny that somehow no one wants the Knicks players yet every season we manage to pull off at least one major trade involving key components of another team.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

kflo said:


> i meant marketable from a trade standpoint, not a commercial standpoint. zach was just basically given away by portland.
> 
> crawford is a guy with limited trade value. lee has some, but mostly as cheap talent with some upside.
> 
> no team is going to want to build around that.



It's known fact that the Blazers had several other deals on the table involving Randolph but choose to move him out of the Western Conference for financial flexibility (Francis) and a guy that people have said to have dazzled them in th offseason with his big man play (Frye). Something tells me that the Blazers thought something of Randolph to go out of their way to move him to the Eastern Conference.

How do you know Crawford has limited trade value? There have been no trade rumors to even suggest where his trade value even is at. I find it hard to believe he is unattractive to teams when he posted some of the best numbers of any 6th man (and quite a few starters) in the league. As for David Lee, catch a game with him to realize that he is a hell of a trade asset BECAUSE OF his cheap salary but emmense talent. I believe there were only 3 or 4 other big men in the league to average a double double and he just happened to do so off the bench.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: I don't really want Kobe*



alphaorange said:


> unless we can get him on the cheap. He doesn't make us good enough to get a title if we give up what everyone thinks we have to give up. He'll be great for another few years and then start his decline. Marbury is gone in two. What does that leave us for young talent and future picks? Marbury, Kobe, and Curry, plus Zach is not going to beat the Spurs, the Mavs, or the Suns anytime in the next three. Prolly not the Pistons, the Bulls, or the Cavs, either. So whats the point? I'll keep what we have, see what we have for this years picks, see how Randolph plays defense and hustles, and go from there. Kobe's great but what is he..30..31? We still owe the Suns a first so we are already down a pick.
> 
> Curry needs work but is a keeper at this point
> Zach...We'll see
> ...


Kobe's 29 and is in the best shape of his life. His decline may come but certainly not anytime soon and very very slowly. A shade of himself is still all-star caliber and that is something worth investing in. Out west he managed to get a team of 2nd round caliber talent to the playoffs. In the East, he very well might help win us a title. That should keep Marbury longer than 2 seasons and even if he does leave, we'd still have Mardy Collins, Nate Robinson and a potential FA signing to replace him. You don't need much next to Kobe.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Hey Twink...*

Unbelievable that some people STILL think Lee is a throw-in. The guy was 6th in the league in boards and 2nd in % while playing limited minutes, until he injured his leg. Coach K told him he had a very good chance of making the Olympic team. Sounds like a very good player to me. Don't worry...it's just Knick envy.


----------



## Mateo (Sep 23, 2006)

Tragedy said:


> Why would we want Lamar Odom? Radmanovic, ok, as long as we don't give up anything important for him. But Odom is not a player you want to bring to NY.
> 
> It's been proven that Odom is a talent who just doesn't have the heart and can't put it together. Even when he had the opportunity to be the clear cut man of the team he disappeared in the playoffs.


.. He's better than Curry and Randolph combined.. You do want Lamar Odom.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

I'm pretty much in agreement with alpha ,

if you gotta send the whole team for kobe then bryant really isn't worth the trouble .

just wait them out and get him on the cheap or not at all.

i think the team the knicks have formed has great potential to be a good team in the league ...and with the team possibly still in the artest sweepstakes, kobe is a want , not a need.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

*Re: Hey Twink...*



alphaorange said:


> Unbelievable that some people STILL think Lee is a throw-in. The guy was 6th in the league in boards and 2nd in % while playing limited minutes, until he injured his leg. Coach K told him he had a very good chance of making the Olympic team. Sounds like a very good player to me. Don't worry...it's just Knick envy.


he's not a throw in - i said he was one of their valuable assets. just don't expect him to be the centerpiece of a big deal. he's a supporting asset.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> It's known fact that the Blazers had several other deals on the table involving Randolph but choose to move him out of the Western Conference for financial flexibility (Francis) and a guy that people have said to have dazzled them in th offseason with his big man play (Frye). Something tells me that the Blazers thought something of Randolph to go out of their way to move him to the Eastern Conference.
> 
> How do you know Crawford has limited trade value? There have been no trade rumors to even suggest where his trade value even is at. I find it hard to believe he is unattractive to teams when he posted some of the best numbers of any 6th man (and quite a few starters) in the league. As for David Lee, catch a game with him to realize that he is a hell of a trade asset BECAUSE OF his cheap salary but emmense talent. I believe there were only 3 or 4 other big men in the league to average a double double and he just happened to do so off the bench.


randolph was dumped, plain and simple. addition by subtraction. they had no big deals for him because he's got baggage, both on the court and off. 

crawford IS a 6th or 7th man, and he's not cheap, and for his skill, he's got questionable basketball iq. the trade rumors aren't there because he's not very high on anyones wish list. 

again, the knicks don't have the pieces to get kobe, and certainly not kobe and odom.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Here's the deal....*

With all due respect to Kobe's talent, BBall is still a five man game. One real superstar is NOT necessarily going to make a team a champion even if he has some talent around him. Kobe's value really is as an unstoppable scorer. His other abilities can be easily duplicated. If he gets 27+, Curry is not going to average more than 16-17 and the same for Randolph. Marbury will become just a distributor(not bad, IMO), and the SF becomes an after thought. I think there most definitely IS a core there that could play with KOBE and compete for a title but there wouldn't be after the trade.

Great player


----------

