# Sham's plan to make things better for the Knicks



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Hello.


Let's clear some things up:

Yes, I am a Bulls fan. But I do not speak through naivety, ignorance or vengeance. I am not here to patronise, annoy, or generally be a dick. This is just an attempt by an interested party to rectify certain things with this team. Like most Bulls fans, I'm watching the Knicks closely. Partly because you own a few of our old players and it's always good to keep tabs on them, and also because of the draft pick situation you all know about. My interest in remedying things was born from these.

So don't be mean. I want the Knicks to lose, so that we have a higher pick. Outside of that, I have no feelings, good or bad, with regards to the Knicks. And it's also important to note that this plan is in no way an attempt to make the Knicks worse. The opposite, in fact. If it results in a small backwards step, fine. But read and accept my logic, and you will see why I propose what I do.




And with that, I'll get started.


The Knicks main problematic issue is the salary situation. Having unlimited pockets and the ability to spend more than anyone else would is a nice luxury. But the Knicks salary issue is too bad. It's unmanagably bad. Now, cap space for this team is not, will not be, and never should be feasible. But cap relief is all important. The situation the Knicks are in now is indicative of why this is. The only players earning less than 5 million this year are the rookies that the Knicks do not want (rightfully) to move. Thus, Isiah's hands are largely tied. When the roster is top to bottom big contracts, it's nigh on impossible to make wholesale changes. And this is why the premise of what I propose is salary based. As I said, I am not looking to achieve cap space, but cap flexibility. I'd like to think I had achieved it.

First off, I think the Knicks have to swallow certain contracts for the forseeable future. The ones I feel this applies to are James (stuck with him, hammer fred. Just pretend he's not there), Curry (more than a contract, I know. Either way, they have made the commitment - see it through), Crawford (ditto) and Marbury (mahoosive contract. For the short term, they ought to stick with that, and let him play to his strengths. In about 12-18 months time, that contract becomes dealable).

This leaves the big fat cheesy deals of Hardaway, Davis, Taylor, Rose and Richardson.

With Penny and Davis, I believe the Knicks should just cut them. Neither helps the team, and the team's MO in recent years of dealing massive expiring contracts for players just flat out doesn't work. It seemed to start with Ewing, didn't work then, and hasn't worked since. The only exception is Nazr for Rose, as two picks came from that. But I cannot see a feasible situation for these, and since as I said cap flexibility is vital, it's best to let these two contracts just expire. There's also two more advantages to cutting them:

a) There's always the buyout possibility, saving a few quid
b) The two freed up roster spots give the team an opportunity to give an audition to some youth. Let's not forget you "discovered" Jackie Butler this way, and he's turning out all right.


As for Taylor, his contract is not too bad. It's for $19 more million, but it only has 8 months left on it. That's not too bad, relatively speaking. I believe the Knicks best bet for Taylor is to just let him play that contract out, or at least, keep him indefinitely. If a decent opportunity to capitalise on someone elses misfortune appears next offseason, you then have a 10 million dollar expiring contract to dangle at them. And if not, when the contract expires, more cap flexibility.


This leaves Rose and Q. The two of whom, I have trades for.



The first is Quentin Richardson and Nate Robinson to Detroit for Carlos Arroyo, Carlos Delfino and Dale Davis.


The chances are you looked at that and said no in a reflex. But here's why.



It's apparent even at this early stage in his Knicks tenure that Nate Robinson just flat out is not a point guard. So, if he's not......what is he? What skills does he have other than jumping, aggressiveness and an inconsistent jumpshot? Not a lot. Nate could, and may well, become an off the bench type small guard in the Earl Boykins/Eddie House/Jannero Pargo role. That's a role every team needs. But it's also a role every team can get. I personally feel he is incredibly overrated, and has massive irreplacable holes in his skill set. As for Q, he's....well. He's not as bad as he has been. But he is being exposed for what he is. A chucker, with a seemingly set-in-stone mindset, with some other skills that he doesn't turn to enough. He is, however, the best player in this deal.

As for what they get in return, it's an interesting package. Dale Davis, not done by any stretch, is a solid, reliable vet, for the price of 3.5 million for this season and next. Delfino is an athletic scoring type, who hasn't done a lot at the NBA level, but has some game, and has a lot of time. Arroyo is a bit of a wild card. He has the pass first mentality, and has some real flair and passing skills. But his outside shot is weak, his defense isnt much better, and he overdribbles. He is, however, better than Nate Robinson. And Dale Davis is better than James. And Delfino is better than Penny. All 3 are rotation worthy players, and all three are pretty cheap. To me, it's a good package.

(As for why Detroit bites on that - Saunders doesn't trust his own bench. Delfino is erratic, as is Arroyo. Maurice Evans is currently their 7th man. He's useful,but not that good. In Q, they get one of the better off-the-bench swingmen around, albeit for a bit of a price. Hunter will be back soon to resume his backup point duties, and until then they get a prospect in Robinson who's not to be sniffed at)





Didn't like that? Well, you'll like this less. But hear me out.



The second trade is Malik Rose and Trevor Ariza for David Wesley, Moochie Norris, and your pick back.

Moochie's crap. You know that. But, he's a 4 million dollar expiring contract (there's a team option for next season at 4,5 mil, but I don't think the Knicks should take that out somehow should this happen). David Wesley is a good solid veteran guard, with an outside shot, and whome will stop the leaky perimeter you have righ tnow. He too has an expiring contract at almost 5 million this year. You also get your pick back, which you gave to the Rockets in the Mo Taylor trade (for some reason). That figures to be in the 30's, or low 40's if things pan out well. And there's always some good stuff kicking around in the 30's. You also get to dump the heinous contract of Rose.

To get that package, all you have to give up is Ariza. Exciting he is, intriguing he is, and a steal he was....but he's not very skilled. He's not a starter. He's an energy player. As with Nate, it's a useful skill, but it's not difficult to replace. Qyntel Woods may even be said replacement, with a better jump shot. Ariza is expendable.

(As for the Rockets, I ummed and arred whether they would do this. Their salary situation isn't great, and they recently waived the combined 10 million in expiring contracts of Weatherspoon and Baker, which they could have packaged for some decent players. So clearly, they do not want to take on salary. Which makes this a bit of a reach. Still, they could use a big, with only Yao and Mutombo at center, and only three power forwards. And right now, they're having to platoon Ryan Bowen, Derek Anderson and Tracy McGrady at small forward. To move Tracy back to the starter there and have Ariza behind him would be good. They still probably wouldn't do this trade, but perhaps if they kept the pick it would help. Or maybe add Butler. Not sure.)





Anyway, after all that above broohaha, you end up with this.


PG - Marbury, Arroyo, Norris
SG - Crawford, Wesley
SF - Delfino, Woods
PF - Frye, Taylor, Lee
C - Curry, Davis, James, Butler





There's one gapingly massive hole there at small forward. There are two intriguing prospects with some potential and some skill, but hardly anything reliable. However, there's always Latrell Sprewell. Or, on a more realistic level, someone like Rodney White. The advantage here is that, with the waiving of Penny and Davis, the roster spot is opened for moves like that. Just please not George bloody Lynch.



This plan gives you two picks this year, not too far apart, in the middle of the draft, plus not giving away the core of Frye, Curry, Crawford, and Lee. Nate and Ariza had to go, but they're expendable anyway. And besides, you get back decent youth in Delfino and Arroyo to replace them.




Most importantly, not only do you keep all future picks, but here's how the salary situation pans out. Trust me on the figures, I run an NBA salary site. So yes I know they aren't the same as Hoopshype. This is deliberate.




2005/2006:


Allan Houston - $19,125,000 
Stephon Marbury - $16,453,125
Penny Hardaway - $15,750,000
Antonio Davis - $13,865,000
Maurice Taylor - $9,100,000
Eddy Curry - $7,394,662
Shandon Anderson - $6,733,000 
Jamal Crawford - $6,545,455 
Jerome Williams - $6,075,000 
Jerome James - $5,000,000
David Wesley - $4,950,000 
Moochie Norris - $4,200,000
Carlos Arroyo - $3,789,475
Dale Davis - $3,500,000 
Channing Frye - $2,162,880
Carlos Delfino - $969,600 
David Lee - $861,360 
Qyntel Woods - $719,373
Jackie Butler - $641,748 


Total = $127,835,678




2006/2007:

Allan Houston - $19,125,000 
Stephon Marbury - $18,281,250
Maurice Taylor - $9,750,000
Eddy Curry - $8,171,103
Shandon Anderson - $7,244,000 
Jamal Crawford - $7,272,730
Jerome Williams - $6,425,000 
Jerome James - $5,400,000
Carlos Arroyo - $4,210,530
Dale Davis - $3,500,000 
Channing Frye - $2,325,000
Carlos Delfino - $1,037,280 
David Lee - $926,040
2006 first rounder: $840,000 ish


Total - $93,667,993



That's $35 million trimmed off and, if you disregard the $31 million you're paying to players not even on the roster which you can't do nothing about, that's your core, intact, with youth, at a totalof $66 million after the two draft picks.


And, if you want to make things look even nicer salary wise, here's 2007/2008:


Stephon Marbury - $20,109,375
Eddy Curry - $8,947,543
Jamal Crawford - $8,000,005
Jerome Williams - $7,050,000 
Jerome James - $5,800,000
Carlos Arroyo - $4,210,530
Channing Frye - $2,487,240
Carlos Delfino - $1,868,141
David Lee - $990,600
2006 first rounder: $920,000 ish
2007 first rounder: 1.5 mil ish

+ 2006 and 2007 second rounders.








Is it so bad? Really? That's a manageable core. And by this time, Marbury, should he still need to be dealt, is dealable. That team is young, talented, has upside, and is a third of the price of the current one. All for what amounts, basically, to giving up Nate and Ariza.



Wouldn't you?



:whoknows:



I would.




Thanks for reading.



:greatjob:


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

lol @ thanks for reading.

man, looks like you just wrote a novel. ill read it, if i ever get forced to....at gun point.

peace.

ps- im not sayin its a bad post...just give me a summary lol


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Spend less time posting useless pap like that and you might have a few spare minutes to read it.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

interesting proposition. Only way I go with that idea is if Oden is the reward. If not I just don't but if we plan on finding a situation to land Oden than go for it.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

knicksfan said:


> interesting proposition. Only way I go with that idea is if Oden is the reward. If not I just don't but if we plan on finding a situation to land Oden than go for it.




But that's dependent on a lot of factors that are out of the Knicks control. The lottery, for one. Oden's health, for another. Oden not busting, a third. Etc. Tanking is too risky a business at the best of times. Without your own first this year, there's even less merit to it. Might as well do some reorganising and save some cash.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

One more thing:


Don't be like your RealGm counterparts and launched those cringeworthy anti Bulls tirades. I am trying to provide some opinion, which maybe we can then debate, and have fun doing so. It doesn't matter who I am.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

ShamBulls said:


> One more thing:
> 
> 
> Don't be like your RealGm counterparts and launched those cringeworthy anti Bulls tirades. I am trying to provide some opinion, which maybe we can then debate, and have fun doing so. It doesn't matter who I am.


If you didn't notice the majority of the members on BBBnet have class and do not go on tirades. With that being said, there was no need to make that statement.


----------



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

Sham, I appreciate all that post-work, in another team's forum no less. I don't think Houston would bite on that deal just for Ariza given that, as you say, he's just not that skilled (I still have hopes for him, but they're a fan's dreams rather than a reasonable conclusion based on skill-assessment). Plus, whatever luster Malik had from the Spurs run is gone--he's "hardworking," but he isn't productive and his skills are narrow and shallow. The Pistons deal is more plausible on both sides to me--either Delfino or Arroyo could blossom with LB in an expanded role (or tank)--though I don't know how Dumars feels about Q's chuckiness. As far as expiring contracts, I have a few disagreements with you. Yes, the Knicks have dealt with them poorly in the past but under different GM direction and I don't think we've seen league-wide that they're no longer a valuable commodity--look at the Golden State deal for Baron Davis for example. What I want out of expiring contracts is pieces that a) can make us better and b) give us chips to deal to Cleveland for Lebron when he makes it clear (if) he doesn't want to resign there and want the bright lights (endorsements) of the huge market NYC is (again, a fan hope rather than a clear-eyed prediction). Still, if they don't end up bringing us, indirectly, Lebron, I still believe expirees could bring us the Al Harringtons of the world and/or allows us to restock with picks to make up for those traded away in the Curry deal, etc.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Kitty said:


> If you didn't notice the majority of the members on BBBnet have class and do not go on tirades. With that being said, there was no need to make that statement.




Sure was. The way I got treated was laughable. I'm not letting it happen again. I don't see how it would, however.





> Sham, I appreciate all that post-work, in another team's forum no less. I don't think Houston would bite on that deal just for Ariza given that, as you say, he's just not that skilled (I still have hopes for him, but they're a fan's dreams rather than a reasonable conclusion based on skill-assessment). Plus, whatever luster Malik had from the Spurs run is gone--he's "hardworking," but he isn't productive and his skills are narrow and shallow. The Pistons deal is more plausible on both sides to me--either Delfino or Arroyo could blossom with LB in an expanded role (or tank)--though I don't know how Dumars feels about Q's chuckiness. As far as expiring contracts, I have a few disagreements with you. Yes, the Knicks have dealt with them poorly in the past but under different GM direction and I don't think we've seen league-wide that they're no longer a valuable commodity--look at the Golden State deal for Baron Davis for example. What I want out of expiring contracts is pieces that a) can make us better and b) give us chips to deal to Cleveland for Lebron when he makes it clear (if) he doesn't want to resign there and want the bright lights (endorsements) of the huge market NYC is (again, a fan hope rather than a clear-eyed prediction). Still, if they don't end up bringing us, indirectly, Lebron, I still believe expirees could bring us the Al Harringtons of the world and/or allows us to restock with picks to make up for those traded away in the Curry deal, etc.




Someone pointed out something to me yesterday about how, when he was in Detroit, Larry didn't get on with either Carlos, and didn't give them much burn. It's a very valid point that I completely overlooked. I've not met one person yet who would do that trade, and uponr eflection, neither would I. It was an oversight. I'll try and think fo something else.


I'm still all for the Rose trade, though. Chances are Houston doesn't touch it. Maybe though, just maybe, they'll reconsider if they don't give up the pick, and also get Jackie Butler. If that's the case, it's then the Knicks who don't do it. So this might be a dead end. But it's worth considering.


----------



## BIGsHOTBOY12345 (Aug 24, 2005)

unlike you sir......... we knicks fans have class, and wont diss you in thw way you SHOULD be dissed... very interesting proposition, but you left out somehthing... WHY DONT YOU GET RID OF ISIAH THOMAS? and its not gonna happen


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Well now that wasn't very nice :|


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

ShamBulls said:


> Well now that wasn't very nice :|


when did this board get so ridiculously soft???


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

cause they keep banning everyone we have. so we gotta adjust......


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

sham your thoughts on the team are appreciated , but i disagree with them.

i absolutely dont think the answer is to cut salary , i think the answer is the opposite actually...to take on more salary and more talent with it , if i could i would simply trade mo taylor for wally z if minny would do it...it would sove the knicks problems on 2 fronts , it gives them another efficient scorer which they desperately need, they while improved on the whole defensively , it hasn't been nearly enough to offset how bad they have been adjusting to LB's offense, even with the improved talent haven't been as good.

the knicks main problems have been the team's adjustment to the offense ...the only thing that helps that is time ...or the addition of savvy vets who can quickly adjust to LB's style of play ...there isn't much time to practice anymore.

the lack of a small forward who is ready to start ...ariza doesn't seem quite ready yet for a fulltime starting gig ...but he has time he is only 20. the team shouldn't have to pay because he is young, it should get a starter quality player until he is ready if ever to unseat them.

and another scorer on the wing , they cant outdefend teams so they might as well outscore them.

wally z accomplishes all three , lasy season the knicks could have dealt K.Thomas for wally but IT held out for a pick, and didn't get it., i think a deal could get done for mo and wally ...maybe the knicks have to kick in some stuff...but usually the it should work , mo taylor has a shorter deal , its over at the end of next season.

if not mo than AD should be dealt , AD is more than enough, the fact that any deal for KG has the wolves saddling them with wally too says they want to dump him.

dealing for backups unless they are 6th man candidates aren't moves that help unless the team really lacks depth , the knicks dont count for that really...they are i believe 2nd to the bulls in points off the bench.


----------



## BIGsHOTBOY12345 (Aug 24, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> sham your thoughts on the team are appreciated , but i disagree with them.
> 
> i absolutely dont think the answer is to cut salary , i think the answer is the opposite actually...to take on more salary and more talent with it , if i could i would simply trade mo taylor for wally z if minny would do it...it would sove the knicks problems on 2 fronts , it gives them another efficient scorer which they desperately need, they while improved on the whole defensively , it hasn't been nearly enough to offset how bad they have been adjusting to LB's offense, even with the improved talent haven't been as good.
> 
> ...



Thank you GRINCH, and merry christmas!!! :mob: :raised_ey :biggrin:


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> sham your thoughts on the team are appreciated , but i disagree with them.
> 
> if i could i would simply trade mo taylor for wally z if minny would do it...it would sove the knicks problems on 2 fronts , it gives them another efficient scorer which they desperately need, they while improved on the whole defensively , it hasn't been nearly enough to offset how bad they have been adjusting to LB's offense, even with the improved talent haven't been as good.
> 
> ...


Wally can play D????

Grinch,I dont think you will ever convince larry of "if you cant defend them,outscore them"..

I do think Wally would increase the basketball IQ of the team by 50%


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

truth said:


> Wally can play D????
> 
> Grinch,I dont think you will ever convince larry of "if you cant defend them,outscore them"..
> 
> I do think Wally would increase the basketball IQ of the team by 50%



no wally cant play d 

and if you observe LB's career you would notice he has shown the ability to coach a run and score type of game...he hasn't really done it much since he was the coach of the clippers....in fact 11 of his 28 seasons his teams have scored more than avg....his slow paced rep is not really deserved , its just a preference he has...and he needs to let go of it for the good of the team.

the name of the game is still to outscore your opponents , either by stopping them more , or outscoring them.

a coach's job is to win , how doesn't matter,


----------



## 85 lakers (Dec 22, 2005)

I still think the Knicks are a 30-35 win team this season (the division is AWFUL, no 5-win team in the bach) but for next year ... 

1) PLEASE do NOT deal Penny and Antonio Davis. Let their bloated contracts expire, and wave goodbye.

2) Channing Fyre is untradeable unless something bizarre and wacky happens (Duncan, Kobe, T-Mac, etc).

3) Starting lineup: Curry, Frye, Ariza, Marbury, Q Rich

4) The Knicks could really use a SG and a SF. Let's say the Knicks get a pick around 10-12. You know who's going to be there. JJ Redick. Well? My only problem with him is that between Q Rich, Marbury, and Crawford, this team SHOULD shoot well. I still believe they can, give them 20-25 more games together.

5) No need to dream about Rudy Gay ... he's going to be gone. Morrison plays horrible defense, and this team NEEDS defense. It doesn't need offense. I think Ronnie Brewer or Rodney Carney, to great, long, athletic players would be a good fit. A guy NY would LOVE would be Diaz in Miami, but he's not a lottery pick.

6) Knicks fans simply need patience.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

85 lakers said:


> 4) The Knicks could really use a SG and a SF. Let's say the Knicks get a pick around 10-12. You know who's going to be there. JJ Redick. Well? My only problem with him is that between Q Rich, Marbury, and Crawford, this team SHOULD shoot well. I still believe they can, give them 20-25 more games together.
> 
> 5) No need to dream about Rudy Gay ... he's going to be gone. Morrison plays horrible defense, and this team NEEDS defense. It doesn't need offense. I think Ronnie Brewer or Rodney Carney, to great, long, athletic players would be a good fit. A guy NY would LOVE would be Diaz in Miami, but he's not a lottery pick.
> 
> 6) Knicks fans simply need patience.


Actually the Bulls have the Knicks draft pick in 2006 and get to swap with them in 2007. That probably increases the amount of patience the Knicks fans must have.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

knicksfan said:


> interesting proposition. Only way I go with that idea is if Oden is the reward. If not I just don't but if we plan on finding a situation to land Oden than go for it.


How can the Knicks get Oden anyways? If they land the top pick in 2007 the Bulls can swap the pick, so there is 0% chance the Knicks get Oden or anyone else in the first 15 picks.


----------



## 85 lakers (Dec 22, 2005)

My error on the draft pick. 
Well I suppose they'll need to find that lockdown 3 via free agency ... and it ain't Mike Dunleavy.

http://probasketball.about.com/od/newsrumorsopinion/a/nbafreeagents06.htm

Hmmm, from that last, I'd avoid Bonzi Wells (cancer), Vlad Rad (euros dont defend well), and Jared Jefferies.

James Posey, anyone? He's long and can hit the occasional three ... I'm not sure how good a defender he is. 

I despite Larry Brown for what he's done (Danny Manning saga, how he punked the Pistons, etc, etc), but the man can coach. I thought they'd be in the playoffs this season, but Curry's injury has hurt. And at some point, Brown's going to have to teach him how to alter shots and rebound a bit better.

As much as people love Frye and hate Marbury, I think Curry is the key to this team.


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

If you still want another PG while getting rid of Marbury, you should try to do this...

Trade Marbury and Ariza for Wally and Troy Hudson, and after that...

Three team move: Maurice Taylor, Jackie Butler (just to free a roster spot), David Lee and Q Richardson to Denver, while Denver send Eddy Najera to Portland and Watson, Lenard and Nene to NY, with Portland sending Ruben Patterson to NY

This second move can works with or without the Marbury move... If Marbury move don't happens, then move Penny for Jalen Rose (yes, he CAN HELP THIS TEAM)

Lineup with both moves:

Curry/Frye/James
Frye/Nene(when healthy)/Rose
Wally/Ruben/Qyntel/Penny
Crawford/Lenard/Qyntel/Penny/Nate
Watson/Hudson/Nate

Lineup with just the second move and with Jalen Rose in this team:

Curry/Frye/James
Frye/Nene(when healthy)/Malik Rose
Jalen Rose/Ruben/Ariza/Qyntel
Crawford/Marbury/Lenard/Qyntel/Nate
Marbury/Watson/Nate


----------

