# Rumor: Knicks Taking Lee Off The Market



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> Put the trade talk involving David Lee to rest for now. The Knicks might be more inclined to try to re-sign the popular forward rather than deal him before the Feb. 19 trade deadline, according to multiple sources. Lee, the 30th overall draft pick in 2005, ranks fifth in the NBA with 11.2 rebounds per game, has recorded a double-double in 20 of the last 23 games and has emerged as one of Mike D'Antoni's most important players. Lee will be a restricted free agent this summer after the Knicks were unable to come to an agreement on a contract extension before the start of the season. It is believed that Lee, who will make $1.7 million this season, was seeking about $10 million per season in a new deal. With the focus on having salary-cap space for 2010, Donnie Walsh wasn't inclined to give out lavish raises off a 23-win team. But after watching Lee for almost half a season, Walsh has told confidants that he has changed his mind about Lee.


http://www.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/ny-spkbox105993880jan10,0,1713259.story

If this is true, good move by Walsh. I knew it was business, but I'm happy if they keep him, good character and hard working player. Now what happens to Nate? I think the more he shoots at a dismal rate, the more likely he becomes expose.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i guess i'm gonna be the dissenter on this one...i think unless lee and nate can be retained for a discount they should be dealt as long as this bad 2010 plan is in existance.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

This is the type of player you pawn off on some other idiot GM. He's going to get overpaid ugly, and he's not even a scorer to the point where he'll occasionally contribute huge to wins. He's a glorified dirty worker.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I don't dissent....*

I am all for trading him AS LONG AS IT HELPS THE TEAM. I don't want to see him traded just for cap relief. The guy is averaging 16 and 13 since the trade. That is worth something very significant, especially for a team lacking a rebounder. I would package him for Rudy, Sergio, and Frye, however. Lee, Nate, and?


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

*Re: I don't dissent....*



alphaorange said:


> I am all for trading him AS LONG AS IT HELPS THE TEAM. I don't want to see him traded just for cap relief. The guy is averaging 16 and 13 since the trade. That is worth something very significant, especially for a team lacking a rebounder. I would package him for Rudy, Sergio, and Frye, however. Lee, Nate, and?


His numbers are not significant AT ALL.

NO ONE on that team's numbers are significant.

Why? Because they are a losing team and the stats are inflated.

Al Harrington is averaging 20points, right? i guess we don't need to have a plan for 2010 since we have a 21ppg scorer and 3 guys doing at or around 15.

If David Lee gets a contract where he makes 8 figures in ANY given year, he wouldn't be worth it.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

*Re: I don't dissent....*

Sorry, I didn't realize you said you're open for trading him. I agree completely with what you said. he shouldn't be traded for scraps. simultaneously he shouldn't be paid like a franchise player


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

16/13 is VERY significant. It is in line with what he has always done with time and if it was easy more guys would come close to it. Name one guy doing it who is not named Howard.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

It's not "easy" but it is certainly easier when you're basically our only rebounding threat.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*As I said...*

Rebounding is what he has always done, no matter who he has been paired with. He's not just fighting teammates for boards, you know. Granted, there are only so many to go around, but Lee actually gets them. 5th in the league total, and 2nd in the league since the trade. You're kidding right? Maybe you didn't know the stats?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: As I said...*



alphaorange said:


> Rebounding is what he has always done, no matter who he has been paired with. He's not just fighting teammates for boards, you know. Granted, there are only so many to go around, but Lee actually gets them. 5th in the league total, and 2nd in the league since the trade. You're kidding right? Maybe you didn't know the stats?


no one is saying Lee cant board its obvious he is one of the best in the league at that ...but he is going to ask for big money ...and he should but he wont be worth it i think in the 10 mil. range give or take a mil or 2 , but he will likely get it from some1, if not this year than next year , i think he will most likely find the well empty this offseason and be some1's consolation prize in the summer of 2010(like ron mercer for the bulls in 2000 when they bombed out on duncan , t-mac grant hill eddie jones and others )...its better the knicks get value for him now.

nate should also be dealt for the same reason but its more likely the knicks should keep him his price should be much lower , but still likely inflated , but if they can get him for a good enough price than why not?

these 2 guys are not foundation pieces, they are bench players on top tier teams , no top tier(meaning top 7-10 in the league) team can get away with a starting power forward who isn't a good defender who cant at least draw double teams on offense or at least have some ability that makes it easier for the less talented players to score in a set offense....being a top rebounder isn't enough....being just a good scorer/shooter but a bad defender at a generously listed 5'9, isn't enough, to wreck chances to get 2 max level players especially after all the cost cutting activities walsh has already done.


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

*Re: As I said...*



Da Grinch said:


> no one is saying Lee cant board its obvious he is one of the best in the league at that ...but he is going to ask for big money ...and he should but he wont be worth it i think in the 10 mil. range give or take a mil or 2 , but he will likely get it from some1, if not this year than next year , i think he will most likely find the well empty this offseason and be some1's consolation prize in the summer of 2010(like ron mercer for the bulls in 2000 when they bombed out on duncan , t-mac grant hill eddie jones and others )...its better the knicks get value for him now.
> 
> nate should also be dealt for the same reason but its more likely the knicks should keep him his price should be much lower , but still likely inflated , but if they can get him for a good enough price than why not?
> 
> these 2 guys are not foundation pieces, they are bench players on top tier teams , no top tier(meaning top 7-10 in the league) team can get away with a starting power forward who isn't a good defender who cant at least draw double teams on offense or at least have some ability that makes it easier for the less talented players to score in a set offense....being a top rebounder isn't enough....being just a good scorer/shooter but a bad defender at a generously listed 5'9, isn't enough, to wreck chances to get 2 max level players especially after all the cost cutting activities walsh has already done.


I concur completely with above statement.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*What should a guy like that command?*

1) Top five rebounder
2) 55+% fg, 80% ft
3) Good enough offensively to run a few plays for now, and can get you 18ppg if you run 4-5 a game for him
4) Can get you 2-3 assists

I have a feeling if you didn't know we were talking about Lee, you'd have no problem paying a guy like that 10m. Add to that all his hustle and chemistry he brings. He'll get 10 and he should. He is a guy LeBron would want. Hell, he wanted Verajao to get his 8 or so and he can't hold Lees jock. Why don't we talk about what players are in his class and what they get? Will somebody add some possible names so we can get the ball rolling?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: What should a guy like that command?*



alphaorange said:


> 1) Top five rebounder
> 2) 55+% fg, 80% ft
> 3) Good enough offensively to run a few plays for now, and can get you 18ppg if you run 4-5 a game for him
> 4) Can get you 2-3 assists
> ...


simply put Lee's defense has been abysmal this season , so in spite of his impressive stats , he is not a starter on a championship level team., he used to be mediocre but at least he was trying hard ...now he isn't trying as hard as he used to and at center where is often playing it really shows. the knicks have been forced to double team guys like andrew bogut this season , as bad a defender curry is considered to be , the knicks really never had to fear such mundane scoring threats with him manning the post.

its a really simple if you can name a true starting 4 on a championship team that was neither a good defender or a good enough offensive player that he either required a regular double team or was such a good shooter/scorer he spaced the floor and made it easier for others to score because the other team had to scheme and gameplan him in lets say the last 25 years, i'll drop this and say you are right ...but if the knicks are serious about winning , lee is the type of player you milk other teams into giving up a foundation piece for or at least a true starter for...and you let them hamstring themselves with a 60 million $ contract.

if james had to pick he wouldn't choose lee over ben wallace who starts for the cavs at PF if he needed a win today.

to me lee is a leon powe type player(stats back it up on a per minute basis ...and of course powe is a better defender) , a very good bench player on a good team....but no starter or even close to one on that level of team ...anderson V on the cavs is a very good defensive player ...i dont know why you brought a random cav bench player into the mix , but i'll let you explain that later .

lee can get points in the 1st few quarters but would you feel comfortable running plays for lee when division rivals are running them for vince carter and devin harris ...or pierce and garnett, or bosh , or brand in the 4th quarter ?

is lee really on their level offensively ?

simply put Lee is no star...but 10 mil. a season is star money, not top guy max money but 2nd star money, and since the knicks have become bean counters until summer of 2010, they cant overspend on guys who aren't essential or at that level of importance...that of course includes nate too.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

> simply put Lee's defense has been abysmal this season , so in spite of his impressive stats , he is not a starter on a championship level team., he used to be mediocre but at least he was trying hard ...*now he isn't trying as hard as he used to and at center where is often playing it really shows.* the knicks have been forced to double team guys like andrew bogut this season , as bad a defender curry is considered to be , the knicks really never had to fear such mundane scoring threats with him manning the post.


I couldnt disagree respectively more......

Lee is not a good defender true.....but to say he isnt trying hard is a joke IMO. He is undersized every single night. And all I see is him busting his butt to try and keep these guys in front on him and under control. And also fight these same bigger players for rebounds. Its not that hes not trying hard its that he is not a center.

Didnt have to worry about players scoring in the post with Curry in the game?? Maybe Im watching different games lmao. He would just stand around and watch players go right by him. You critize Lee for not trying as hard then you bring Curry into the conversation? Only reason Curry is better fit is because of his size. He is the lazest player in the NBA.

As far as im concerned Lee is the hardest working player in all parts of the game. Worth 10mill?...no, but to say he isnt working as hard isnt fair.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*82games.com*

..says that Lee is a +3 over his opponents at the center position. What more do you want? His PF stats are much less but I think given the same minutes they would be much better. We'll see.


----------



## ThreePointer (May 5, 2008)

no reason to trade him...very bright upside and is one of our best players as we speak...plus a fan favorite


----------



## benfica (Jul 17, 2002)

I have been off these boards for years and as I read all the above posts it occurs to me how there is a double standard here. I though during the draft the knicks got a steal in Lee, as I though he should have been a lottery pick if not for his color of hiss skin. Isiah reluctantly drafted LEE as he was told he was the best player on the board. Than for the next 3 years Isiah keeps him on the bench, even though he looked like one of the better players on the court. Isiah, even tried to trade for a player to play over LEE. 

Interest around the league for LEE's services was apparent, as teams called on the Knicks with trade interests more than any other knick. I guess the Knicks felt they had some value in Lee as a white fan draw and league interests to hold on to him. But Lee, never complained and kept playing hard and showing he belonged when he received extended minutes. When getting 30+ minutes he put up impressive numbers regardless of the team's record. He came to be so impressive that playing time could no longer be denied.

After 3+ years playing on a team who didn't appreciate his ability nor planned on making him a starter, Lee is now to the point of being a force in the league. He is one of the top rebounding players in the league, and since basketball is basketball great rebounders are more rare than scorers. A top rebounder is always a missing link in a team's ability to reach the elite status..why in the past guys rebounding specialists like Rodman were so valuable and sought after. If you a player is one of the top rebounders and can get you 18 points than your talking about 10+ million per year...and after 3 years of underserving love why should LEE not go after the big bucks. 

Anyways, LEE reminds me a great deal of Dave Cowens, another undersized center who put up similiar numbers, was a team player and a winner.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Disagree...*

Thomas played him quite a bit. Lee was never considered a lotto pick and it wasn't his skin color. he simply didn't dominate in college. His level of achievement is a surprise to everyone, except, apparently, you. He is as good as he is because he works very hard on his game and plays hard all the time. He showed nothing to be considered lotto. Also, teams were not calling for Lee except as a guy off the bench until this year. Your' facts are not facts. You like comparing to the great white Celtics, I see. Lee and Cowens are nothing alike except both are white, undersized and play hard. Cowens was a very good shooter to 20 feet....a nasty defender..and a very good offensive player. Lee is a very good passer...a great rebounder...a so-so shooter..a very good ball handler....and a pretty mediocre defender. Not so similar at all.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> " SOMETIMES, change is easy. An unpopular coach gets whacked. A bumbling general manager gets pushed aside. Underachieving players get sent out of town for a rack of balls and a couple of nickels on the dollar. That's the easy part.
> 
> Exiling Isiah Thomas was easy. Trading Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford, that was easy. Altering the culture of losing around the Knicks, selling everyone on 2010, allowing everyone's mind to drift toward the future, convincing everyone that the next two years will be one long series of exhibitions . . .
> 
> ...


http://www.nypost.com/seven/01242009/sports/knicks/letting_david_go_not_easi_lee_done_151647.htm


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

benfica said:


> I have been off these boards for years and as I read all the above posts it occurs to me how there is a double standard here. I though during the draft the knicks got a steal in Lee, as I though he should have been a lottery pick if not for his color of hiss skin. Isiah reluctantly drafted LEE as he was told he was the best player on the board. Than for the next 3 years Isiah keeps him on the bench, even though he looked like one of the better players on the court. Isiah, even tried to trade for a player to play over LEE.
> 
> Interest around the league for LEE's services was apparent, as teams called on the Knicks with trade interests more than any other knick. I guess the Knicks felt they had some value in Lee as a white fan draw and league interests to hold on to him. But Lee, never complained and kept playing hard and showing he belonged when he received extended minutes. When getting 30+ minutes he put up impressive numbers regardless of the team's record. He came to be so impressive that playing time could no longer be denied.
> 
> ...



*Bigtime
COSIGN!*


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*I notice that alot of us never took the time to evaluate David Lee and Nate Robinson services for this Knick team in the last 2 to 3 seasons.* 

*The two young players has been over-shadowed-out by their veteran teammates: inconsistent Crawful, out of shape Curry, no-D Zach, and SG-Marbury performing at the PG, (4-players that average 18 or more turnovers per game for this Knick team).* 

What went unnotice the most was when both "Lee & Nate" came off the bench together bringing this team some young-raw talent of "Energy, Hustle, Chemistry, and excitement from how two players out played 2 out of every 3 oponents comming off the bench"....to not recall or be aware of this....plus the complete turn-over ratio from 18 to 12 in this Knicks season from the last two seasons where the offense went directly to Curry, Crawful, Zach, with a SG-Marbury distributing the ball as the PG on practically every offensive play. 

*For Knick-Fans to actually believe these two young players value ($$$) after their rookie contract season is only worth a MLE Max.... is absurd. Especially for all the Knick-Fans that think Boris Diaw is worth 6 years $54M.* 

*The so-call 2010 plan should've been over looked or pushed to the side to extend Lee & Nate contract on Oct. 30 2008.* The Knicks extension should've been offered at: 
Lee could've been offered a 6 year contract starting at $7.5M, 8, 9, 10, 11, $12M. 
Nate could've been offered a 6 year contract starting at $6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, $9M. 

*With the season that Lee and Nate are having at the end of their rookie contract the next team minimum offersheet will start at 5 years:* 
(Lee) $8.5M, 9, 10, 11, $12M. 
(Nate) $7.5M, 8, 8.5, 9, $9.5M. 

These are two young players with a winning-attitude that learned fast on what not to have in a manager, headcoach, coaching-staff, and teammates on a winning team.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

I'd trade Lee for a guy like Nene if it came along. We need a legitimate 4 and don't like the prospects of starting him for 35mpg+ at the 5 spot. Danilo is coming along nicely and it appears that it will be only a matter of time before he makes the shift to the 4 spot permanaently once he adds some weight to his frame.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Lee may get that money from the Knicks...*

But Nate will not get what you are suggesting unless he finishes the season playing like last night. He is a sixth man, although a very good one. Lee has always been good no matter who he plays with but Duhon is the one rocking the pick and roll with Lee, not Nate. Switch Nate to PG and Lee's numbers drop across the board.


----------

