# Who should we take if the Knicks pick ends up being #1 overall??



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

It's weird, yet totally possible, that the Knicks get the #1 pick overall. 

This would put us in a weird predicament of having a shot at the best possible player in the draft, but not necessarily finding a player that would suit our needs. Gay and Morrison are considered the top talents in the draft, more than Aldridge, and rightly so. But both are the uber-prospects at SF.

Would you try and trade down the pick? Do you think we could nab a deal like Zaza + Atlanta's pick (say they ended up near #3) and their 2nd rounder for our #1 overall pick plus, say, Duhon?

And if you DID have to take a player and you couldn't trade him, who would you take?

It's just such a weird position to be in, because at PG and SF we are the most solid, while at every other position I'd be more than happy to supplant the starter (well, not Gordon at SG, but that's my personal bias; I couldn't blame Pax if he took a megastar-looking SG).

What would you do? Take Morrison and just be done with it?


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

I've been advocating best non-point guard available with the Knicks pick, but that has been under the assumption that it wouldn't be the top pick.

Admittedly, I have not scouted the collegiate prospects as closely as I usually do and I know literally nothing about the foreign prospects other than what I read, so take this opinion for what its worth:

Aldridge.

Edit: I refuse advocating players I've never observed before, like Bargnani or Splitter, but I admit my ignorance when doing so.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

I haven't really seen any of the prospects play, but FWIW I'm leaning toward Bargnani right now.

He seems to have the perfect offensive game to complement Tyson up front, and he has been playing very well in the Euroleague over the last month or so.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

I've always been on board as advocating that Knicks pick as a good one. (wait till next year too!) I don't know about #1, but if we did happen to get lucky, I'd say take the best big available. If that's Aldridge - grab him. If Pax thinks Bargnani is the next euro to make a splash - take him #1. There isn't a player in this draft that that screams definate #1. There's like five or six players who are kind of grouped together. Pax could look at trading down if he could get an unprotected 2007 pick out of some team, but I doubt that any GM (other than Zeke and we already have their unprotected 2007 pick!) would do something like that.

As an aside, anybody know who pax was looking at whilst in europe these last couple of weeks? Two weeks is a fair amount of time to be scouting.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

I haven't scouted as much this season as in years past either so take my reccomendation with a grain of salt too. First, I would be curious to know where our pick lies as well, if we have a #1 & a #5 for instance it makes it easier to take a guy like Gay or Morrison with the 5th pick and still have a shot at a Bargnani or Aldridge (though doubtful) later. That being said, I think with the #1 pick we would probably have to go with Gay, Aldridge, or Bargnani, probably Gay who I don't think will have any trouble playing the 2 on the next level. I guess it also depends a lot on what we are looking to do in free agency as well.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

If u take Gay at the TWO, do u TRADE Gordon? Obviously he wouldn't be happy about coming off the bench for a rookie.

Trade Gordon to Utah for Memet Okur (19PPG & 10RPG)

C Okur
F Chandler
F Deng
G Gay
G Hinrich


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

The ROY said:


> If u take Gay at the TWO, do u TRADE Gordon? Obviously he wouldn't be happy about coming off the bench for a rookie.
> 
> Trade Gordon to Utah for Memet Okur (19PPG & 10RPG)
> 
> ...



If Utah would do that I would be all over it but I doubt they would. Maybe if we threw in one of our first rounders maybe...


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

ace20004u said:


> If Utah would do that I would be all over it but I doubt they would. Maybe if we threw in one of our first rounders maybe...


Okur's a BEAST this season & trading him would leave them VERY thin up front, especially with Boozer injured every week.

Deron Williams & Ben Gordon would be the smallest backcourt in the league and they'd constantly have 40PT games dropped on them.

G Williams
G Gordon
F Kirilenko
F Boozer
C ?

Yeah, it won't happen but it's nice to dream


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

The Bulls should take the most athletic person available, and I have no idea who that is. Don't watch much college ball outside of the Badgers (and boy, ticket brokers want more money than I'm willing to fork over for tonight's Illinois/Wisconsin game).

And speaking of games, we don't have a game thread for this evening.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

The thing about Gay is that he still looks really raw. I mean, he's lightning quick, has good moves, can shoot the ball from anywhere and defend fairly well. Combine that with great size and athleticism, and you've got a serious player. But he's sort of like Marvin Williams: he'd be drafted on potential. They say that he doesn't yet have a killer instinct, he doesn't take over games, he doesn't carry a team on his back, etc.

So even if we took Gay, I don't think he'd start over Gordon or Deng. To be honest, I still think Deng is a better long-term SF prospect. Luol hasn't improved a ton since his rookie year, because of his offseason injury, but even with that he's put together a solid season and was the most consistent Bull when everyone else was in a funk. This season actually resembles his rookie season, in that very same fashion. When Luol starts to improve his conditioning, strength, and works on his ability to create on the dribble... the guy will be a TRUE small forward, a rare commodity in the NBA.

Morrison is the guy that is ready to come in and take over a starting spot. If he really could do it at the SG spot... I dunno. J.J. Redick can get it done there too, and I think Redick is being passed over because of his stature and the stigma of hatred around him, but if Redick were a sophomore right now and was two inches taller, I think he'd be the #2 pick behind Morrison, maybe even the #1.

Adam Morrison defends okay but not great, but he does know what it means to play as a part of a team. I dunno that we could pass up on him.

I'd look at Bargnani as well, but we just need more scouting reports on the guy.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

I only followed potential top 5 pick, especially Aldridge, Gay, Morrison and Reddick.

Every time I saw them playing, my own evaluation or expectation of two of them got worse and worse. They often looked lost or invisible on the court. And their name is Aldridge and Gay. Aldridge only reminds me of Chandler with some college experiences. Maybe controlled overall player than Chandler but not a dominating force on offensive end. Gay wasn't impressive at all. Othern great showing of his athletic ability on a breakaway dunk, i haven't seen a thing that he is excellent yet. 

One of them, from the early on and still I have my doubt on his prospect as a NBA player. Terrific college player but is he going to be a good NBA player? And his name is Reddick.

Only one out four, my own expectation of him never falter as I kept watching them playing. And his name is Morrison. 

I can't elaborate any further but he reminds me of Wade couple of years back. I am not talking about playing style because they are so different as a player. But just like when I watched Wade back then, when I watched Morrison I am feeling something special is brewing here.

If I must pick, I am taking Morrison regardless with the jam in SF position on our roster.


Oh, I might add that I am not impressed with Marvin. At all.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Rudy Gay is worth it IMO especially since we NEED athleticism on a team SORELY lacking it.

Adam Morrison is a sure thing.

LaMarcus Alderidge is the player we PROBABLY need most though.


----------



## 4door (Sep 5, 2005)

remember this team is run by 2 short, white, 3pt shooters... Knicks pick - Morrison...Bulls pick Redick! Then Hinrich/Reddick/Morrison all in the starting lineup! Hells yes! All we do is jack up 3's and run a college style offense and on D we just run trap after trap! I am totally serious if an NBA team had Reddick and Morrison both starting I would watch every game. They might give up 120 ppg, but they might score 125.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Very interesting question at the top of the thread. I've been advocating drafting big, but if it becomes clear that we can draft a truly special player, regardless of position, I think we go for it. We can still grab the best available big when our own pick comes around. Ultimately if we pull in Przybilla and Al Harrington in FA, we've got all five spots on the floor taken care of with a worthy back-up as well. Our first pick, then, should be for the biggest difference maker on the board. If the pick drops low enough where we are out of that type of range, then we take best big available.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

4door said:


> remember this team is run by 2 short, white, 3pt shooters... Knicks pick - Morrison...Bulls pick Redick! Then Hinrich/Reddick/Morrison all in the starting lineup! Hells yes! All we do is jack up 3's and run a college style offense and on D we just run trap after trap! I am totally serious if an NBA team had Reddick and Morrison both starting I would watch every game. They might give up 120 ppg, but they might score 125.


The white comment aside, I'd say that this is an interesting team I'd watch as well.

Toss Ray Allen on that team, along with Damon Jones, Dirk, Robert Horry and Danny Ferry.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Aldrigde, no doubt. He might be a tad soft, but he's got more potential than Morrison. Andrea Bargani could pull a Vasquez or a Darko. Foreign prospects are never a safe bet.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

The ROY said:


> Rudy Gay is worth it IMO especially since we NEED athleticism on a team SORELY lacking it.
> 
> Adam Morrison is a sure thing.
> 
> LaMarcus Alderidge is the player we PROBABLY need most though.



If we got the Number one pick - Paxson would look to trade down a slot or three. I wouldn't blame him really. There is no clear cut Number 1 and in the top six you have five very good players who will contribute to their teams. 

Here is my current order:

1 - LaMarcus Aldrige - Steady and has alot more potential. He can man the center position for the next 10 years for us. He's not spectacular, but will show those occassional times of taking over the post position. He'll struggle early as he adjusts in the NBA, but should be very solid to very good for a long time. He's number one on my list because of our desperate team need and he does have a lot of talent on both ends of the floor. I wish he showed more fire.

2 - Bargnani - No, I haven't seen him. I've read everything I can get my hands on about this guy and what I read makes me salivate. if Chandler were to continue to be consistently strong ont he defensive end and develop more agressiveness on the offensive end of the floor; Bargnani might be the besst choice. He appears to be the real package that can excel on both ends of the floor and will open up the entire floor for the inside and outside. Very intriguing, just wish we could see what the scouts are seeing in person. Gotta put your faith in the scouts on this guy.

3 - Rudy Gay - We've all been clamoring for a Superstar type player. This guy shows those flashes and more. If he was more consistent he'd be a lock. However, he's on a very good team and can be a bit laid back during games. Almost too content to be a superstar. Still, he is talent oozing everywhere. If somehow we ended up with say 2 and 5 he'd be a definite target. I think his individual workouts will turn up the buzz machine big time on him.


4 - Tiago Splitter - This guy is Rlucas' find from a year or two ago. Since then I have read everything I could about him. Another player I wish we could see, but have to rely on scouts for. His overall game is ready for the NBA and he fills mutliple needs. He is gonna make some team, and Rlucas, very happy.

5 - Tyrus Thomas - Yes, before Morrison. The reason is simple. The guy is an insane specimen of athleticism and will immediately be a defensive presence. He has good hands and seems to have good BB IQ (two things Chandler has little of). He and Chandler would be an insane defensive duo..........but equally poor offensive duo. Tough one, but he definitely fills a need and if he grows another inch or two (he grew 2 inches last summer) and continues to develop his offensive game.....he'd be insane.

6 - Adam Morrison - yes, he is a scoring machine. Dead eye with coolness running through his veins. He can score at will (atelast at the collegiate level) and has great court vision. He is instant offense. Hoever, on the defensive end, he is very average when he tries. When he doesn't try, a coach like Skiles will bench him. I have a really hard time seeing Morrison fitting in our team system and meshing with our team philosophy. Again, we have no inside presence and have a pourous defense. Two things I think a team picking him must excel at.

Honorable mention - Brewer, Carney, Williams and Williams. 

Overall, I am very happy with having the knicks pick and think we are gonna get a valuable piece of the puzzle with that pick. If we make make the playoffs (and I hope we do) there is still plenty ofvalue in the middle of the first round. Plus, Pax may be able to package it for another piece.

Alot really depends on CHandler showing us consistency and development to be locked in as a starter at either the C or PF position.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

WTChan said:


> Aldrigde, no doubt. He might be a tad soft, but he's got more potential than Morrison. Andrea Bargani could pull a Vasquez or a Darko. Foreign prospects are never a safe bet.


For every Dirk, there's a Darko

For every Gasol, there's a Bagaric

For every Ginobli, there's a Dragan Tarlac.

Point being, I haven't seen a thing saying that foreign prospects are less of a sure thing than home grown prospects. I haven't watched a lot of Bargani, but that's for Pax and the talent crew to judge.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

kevin garnett.

if its #1 trade him for kg.

there is no one in this draft even close to kg's talent


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

Auction it 

See who comes knocking 


1. #1 and #10 ( ours currently ) + Chris Duhon and Andres Nocioni for Kevin Garnett and Trent Hassell?

Wolves would have a supporting cast of Duhon , Jaric , Davis , McCants , Nocioni and Blount + the #1 pick and two mid round first picks -ours and theirs 

They would have cap room to rebuild and draft picks to try and land their superstar

It only makes sense for us to do this trade if we think we can 2 or 3 championships in the next 3 - 5 years with 

*

Chandler
Garnett
Deng
Gordon
Hinrich

bench

Hassell + vet MLE /LLE additions 

*

I probably wouldn't do it for the Bulls actually ..leaves us too thin which is exactly the issue KG has in Minnesota

A better move would be to try and and offer up #1 and our current #10 for Chris Bosh - who is still on his rookie contract and would still preserve the cap room space for us 

Toronto could take Aldridge and Gay with their #1 and #3 picks and they may luck into Hilton Armstrong at #22. I would expect them to take one of Brewer, Shawne Williams or Carney at #10 with our pick ...Brewer makes the most sense but I would run with Shawne Williams ..the prospect of he and Rudy Gay on the wings is pretty unique

In terms of the question in the other thread about spending our free agency dollars now or saving it for 2007 and who will be the biggest player in 2007 free agency ? It was already the Raptors anyway ..but if they do this deal they don't have to payout max dollars now for Bosh and they preserve around another $6M in free agency bucks in 2007 in the differential in what they would have to pay Bish Bash Bosh and the contract value of the #1 and #10 picks from the 2006 draft 

This would give the Raps the following core going into 2007 free agency with the only salary holdover being Alvin Williams contract for 1 year

*

Aldridge 
Villanueva
Gay
S.Williams
Calderon

bench

Armstrong
Graham
2007 lottery pick ( likely Top 5 )

*

They would have a payroll commitment with those 8 guys on the rookie contracts of approx $23M

They would have $25M to $27M to spend and add to this rookie core in 2007 free agency with a lot of star potential on that rookie roster

Chicago would come out with 

*

Chandler
Bosh
Deng
Gordon
Hinrich

bench
Pryzibilla
Wilcox
Nocioni
Salmons
Duhon

A.Davis
Songaila
Pargo

*

We could likely afford Pryzibilla, Wilcox , AD and Salmons within the space we have available 

Would Toronto deal Bosh for #1 and #10 to buy greater chance at the 2007 lottery and to maximise their space in free agency in 2007 to be the biggest player in the market around that rookie core of 8 

I would if I were them 

And i'd do the deal in a heart beat for Chicago as well


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

the Bosh deal is brilliant IMO, Mr. Froman. Get Bosh and STILL have some space left to fortify the frontcourt with a lane clogger like Pryz - without nuking the core - without even touching it? And giving Toronto both picks might entice them to do it. I love Bosh to death, but is he good enough to turn down a #1 overall and another late lottery/mid-1st rounder if you're Toronto? That's tough to say. A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush, I suppose, but it would at least merit a serious discussion. Toronto gets young and talented and flexible to make a FA run. We just plain get a lot better.

It's great from our point of view and makes a fair amount of sense for Toronto if they start getting nervous that Bosh will wait them out and leave via FA.

I like your KG idea too, but I agree with you that it leaves us pretty thin. And since a lot of the games we win right now are due to our bench stepping up, that's a roll of the dice.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

ViciousFlogging said:


> the Bosh deal is brilliant IMO, Mr. Froman. Get Bosh and STILL have some space left to fortify the frontcourt with a lane clogger like Pryz - without nuking the core - without even touching it? And giving Toronto both picks might entice them to do it. I love Bosh to death, but is he good enough to turn down a #1 overall and another late lottery/mid-1st rounder if you're Toronto? That's tough to say. A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush, I suppose, but it would at least merit a serious discussion. Toronto gets young and talented and flexible to make a FA run. We just plain get a lot better.
> 
> It's great from our point of view and makes a fair amount of sense for Toronto if they start getting nervous that Bosh will wait them out and leave via FA.
> 
> I like your KG idea too, but I agree with you that it leaves us pretty thin. And since a lot of the games we win right now are due to our bench stepping up, that's a roll of the dice.


What he said. And I think Toronto might be crazy enough to do it.

In the end, then:

AD + Curry + our 2007 first rounder

for

Cap Space + Bosh + Sweetney

Doesn't look all that bad. A good recovery to that terrible deal.

I agree that Bosh is better than any two players in the draft, but I think Toronto is getting that Elton Brand-like vibe up there; SOMETHING'S gotta change for them.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

without seeing the guys in the tournament, its hard to say, but the Bulls biggest need _is_ quality size...so... I guess its Bargnonymous, or Lamarvelous, over Gay I wish I knew how to quit ya Rudy.
I'm kind of waiting for March to get a better look at Gay. Can't really say right now if he's good enough to bypass adressing the "height thing"

Morrison is worse than just not a good defender. He's pretty bad. Seems if you make him move laterally, he's dusted. He'll always be the right spot, but he'll need to be in a defensive scheme that hides his shortfalls. Thats a challenge. The other concern thats such a hard thing to quantify is his being a bad diabetic. He sometimes seems to me to have big first halves and fades in the second half. No way for us message boardians know if its the diabetes or what. Maybe thats why he can't play defense as his defense is affected as he conserves energy...... saves his energy for offense. Couple of red flags however, questions that need to be answered. More info needed. 

The Morison pick has different risks, although he's my favorite college player besides Reddick. Those 2 guys are what its all about. Pro prospects aside


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Right now, there are about 4 or 5 guys who could potentially be the #1 pick. Hopefully pre-draft workouts and measurements help clarify some of these things. 

I will say that Tyrus Thomas and Tiago Splitter sound like players who could add a different dimension to this Bulls squad. Splitter is a great athlete at 6'11 who plays defense like a man. Thomas is a freak athlete who is everywhere on the floor.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

yodurk said:


> Right now, there are about 4 or 5 guys who could potentially be the #1 pick. Hopefully pre-draft workouts and measurements help clarify some of these things.
> 
> I will say that Tyrus Thomas and Tiago Splitter sound like players who could add a different dimension to this Bulls squad. Splitter is a great athlete at 6'11 who plays defense like a man. Thomas is a freak athlete who is everywhere on the floor.


Well, Splitter is Jib 100%, so we dont have to worry about that :biggrin: 

He loves to play defence, and is the kind of guy that would stay after practice to improve himself. If he were a Bull, he would be one of the first to report to Berto. 

Also, he had one of the best 2 weeks (By Splitter standards!) when Pax made his european scouting trip during this month.


----------



## nanokooshball (Jan 22, 2005)

I too think that Bosh deal is ruddy brilliant.... it works amazing for both teams... i hope Pax is trolling on the boards looking at this trade.........


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

nanokooshball said:


> I too think that Bosh deal is ruddy brilliant.... it works amazing for both teams... i hope Pax is trolling on the boards looking at this trade.........



Hey Miz, 

Can we get that one in McGraw's hands? That is brilliant and truly something that would be of interest to both teams. i'd love to see him slip it to Pax and his people...or Toronto's people for that matter.

One caviat - Bosh would have to agree to sign a new deal with us (and I wouldn't care that it would be near Max).


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Greg Oden. 

Oh wait, stupid high school rule. 

I really wish we could have the 1st pick next year. Greg Oden is going to be a dominant force in the game. Can we count on the Knicks being terrible again next season? I'm not so sure. 

This draft looks like another crop of great roleplayers. We don't need roleplayers, we need dominance. We need Greg Oden. If not, we need Kevin Garnett. He isn't happy in Minnesota right now, and a #1 pick, with another top 20 pick, plus a Hinrich or Gordon, Chandler, Nocioni or some package like that. We have all the assets at this point. We really do. 

The ball is in Paxson's court. He has so many assets it isn't even funny. If he fumbles this summer, I will lose faith in him completely. Everything he has done in his time here is built up to this summer, in my opinion.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> The ball is in Paxson's court. He has so many assets it isn't even funny. If he fumbles this summer, I will lose faith in him completely. *Everything he has done in his time here is built up to this summer, in my opinion.*


Ain't that the truth. This summer will be what makes or breaks Pax.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

sp00k said:


> Ain't that the truth. This summer will be what makes or breaks Pax.


Even I have to agree with that.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

chifaninca said:


> Hey Miz,
> 
> Can we get that one in McGraw's hands? That is brilliant and truly something that would be of interest to both teams. i'd love to see him slip it to Pax and his people...or Toronto's people for that matter.
> 
> One caviat - Bosh would have to agree to sign a new deal with us (and I wouldn't care that it would be near Max).



just saw this morning and sent an email to mike quoting sausagepatty's idea. figuring he might have some time on his hands in OK city today. so we'll see what he says!


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

chifaninca said:


> Hey Miz,
> 
> Can we get that one in McGraw's hands? That is brilliant and truly something that would be of interest to both teams. i'd love to see him slip it to Pax and his people...or Toronto's people for that matter.
> 
> One caviat - Bosh would have to agree to sign a new deal with us (and I wouldn't care that it would be near Max).


Well it would be a draft day trade and consumated on July 1st .

I believe teams that have a player maturing with an RFA status in the following summer can extend and take them off market if they are both agreeable to a contract from July all the way through to Oct 31

So there would be no need to wear that risk with Chris Bosh ( re : resigning ) as I would imagine he would be only too happy to sign a max offer sheet with us ( which is what we should offer him to ensure he stays off market )

I would hope that Pax gets a deal done with Kirk who has proven himself as well and doesn't allow "the market to determine his value"

Take the mystery out of it -pay them - and let them get out there and play ball

Trust is a beautiful thing if you deep down you know you got the right guys


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> Well it would be a draft day trade and consumated on July 1st .
> 
> I believe teams that have a player maturing with an RFA status in the following summer can extend and take them off market if they are both agreeable to a contract from July all the way through to Oct 31
> 
> ...



hey sausage link, mike was very impressed by your idea:


*I am quite amazed at the amount of thought that went into that plan.

What I've gathered from talking to various people is most every team in the league wants Bosh as badly as the Bulls do and Toronto will almost certainly offer him a max extension this summer, which may very well take him off the market.

That's not to say Pax won't offer both No. 1's to Toronto -- he probably will. I doubt if the Raptors would bite. Then again, an NBA GM once traded Elton Brand for the No. 2 pick so anything is possible.

To really sweeten the offer, I think the Bulls should offer their draft picks for Bosh and Jalen, ridding the Raptors of $16 million in salary. Now that might be tempting. The Bulls could always cut Jalen, of course.

Thanks again for writing. Oklahoma is flat and barren, but I can appreciate a place where the tornados can't sneak up on you.*


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Miz's got a booooyfriiiennd...Miz's got a booooyfriiiennd...


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

Gordon and/or Duhon + Knicks pick + "Knicks" pick in 2007 + taking Alvin Williams' contract would probably be most attractive for the Raptors.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

Frankensteiner said:


> Gordon and/or Duhon + Knicks pick + "Knicks" pick in 2007 + taking Alvin Williams' contract would probably be most attractive for the Raptors.


All that for just CHRIS BOSH!?!?


----------



## nanokooshball (Jan 22, 2005)

I dont want to give up gordon........


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

The ROY said:


> All that for just CHRIS BOSH!?!?


I don't really see that as much at all. We keep our best guard, our best wing player, our best big man, and still have a 1st round pick to replace Gordon with a taller SG.

Bosh is already producing like a superstar. I still don't think the Raptors would do that trade.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

The ROY said:


> All that for just CHRIS BOSH!?!?


I was about to say that......My god we arent trading for Tim DUNCAN!!!!!


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

You guys are totally underrating Bosh. He's pretty close to the Nowitzki/Brand/Garnett production level as a 21 year old. He's already better than Jermaine O'Neal and Pau Gasol. 

Best PF in the game in another 3 years.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

Then you are underrating Gasol and Jermaine, as well.


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

Taking Jalen Rose is unnecessary as he will be gone by 2007 free agency anyway 

Taking Alvin Williams and cutting him eats into our free agency capacity this summer by around $6M but frees up roughly the same for Toronto in 2007 who would have around $30M in free agency bucks and that initial core of 8 I nominated 

*

Aldridge
Villanueva
Gay
Shawne Williams
Calderon

Armstrong
Graham
2007 Draft pick

*


----------



## Machinehead (Jun 12, 2002)

I mean could Toronto really turn down the #1 and #10 from this draft which would give them 4 1st round picks and 3 of them lottery - plus $30M in cap space in 2007 just for Chris Bosh ?

They ink Bosh and retain Alvin Williams and don't do this deal they cost themselves 2 lottery picks from this draft and $17M in foregone cap space in the bumper free agent's crop 

As reluctant as they may be .. you would think that in the overall bigger picture it would be in their best interests to do this deal


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Machinehead said:


> I mean could Toronto really turn down the #1 and #10 from this draft which would give them 4 1st round picks and 3 of them lottery - plus $30M in cap space in 2007 just for Chris Bosh ?
> 
> They ink Bosh and retain Alvin Williams and don't do this deal they cost themselves 2 lottery picks from this draft and $17M in foregone cap space in the bumper free agent's crop
> 
> As reluctant as they may be .. you would think that in the overall bigger picture it would be in their best interests to do this deal



I think it depends entirely on their ability to resign him. Obviously if they can resign him thats the best thing for them to do, if not, thats a pretty sweet deal we're offering.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ace20004u said:


> I think it depends entirely on their ability to resign him. Obviously if they can resign him thats the best thing for them to do, if not, thats a pretty sweet deal we're offering.


They have every ability to resign him they can match whatever offer he gets in RFA and wrap him up 

Of course the its going to be awhile before the Raps are any good and we are much further advanced with the right support pieces in place and the capacity to add further pieces in this summer's free agency ..so this is a much better situation for him

If the Raps offer him a max deal and he knocks them back and goes RFA for 2007 they know that it would make sense for them to deal him , get another two lottery picks and get rid of Alvin W to maximise their free agency spend in 2007 around the core of 8


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Machinehead said:


> As reluctant as they may be .. you would think that in the overall bigger picture it would be in their best interests to do this deal


Would it be in ours?

Supposedly weak draft or not, our 2 picks can result in solid additions (see other threads, and especially if the balls fall for a #1) and at the Knicks pace, we very well may have another high lotto pick in '07. Heck, what does Toronto need that cap space for that they can use that we can't?

Long term, that may net better results than getting Bosh, as good as he is.


----------



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

Sorry to intrude, but the title of this thread makes every Knick fan cry.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Krstic All Star said:


> Sorry to intrude, but the title of this thread makes every Knick fan cry.


I beg to differ, but crying is a distinctly human emotion.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

narek said:


> The Bulls should take the most athletic person available, and I have no idea who that is. Don't watch much college ball outside of the Badgers


That would be Carney, Gay, or possibly Tyrus Thomas who I haven't seen but am very interested in seeing. I saw a very interesting stat on Carney on ESPN this morning. Redick and Morrison's stock is way up due to their near 30 point averages, but Carney actually averages more points per minute.

As for who I would take with the number one pick Aldridge is probably the safe choice, but probably not going to be the best player of the draft when all is said and done, but that kind of reminds me exactly what I said about Elton Brand. Bargnani and Splitter are X-Factors. I'm hoping Shawne Williams or Tyrus Thomas breakout and make themselve's clear cut number one picks. Gay will certainly be good, at worst boderline allstar, but because we have Deng he doesn't sound as optimal. Same goes for Morrison, who I for one don't think is a Pax/Skiles kind of guy because you guessed it he's a bad defender. PAx would have to chose between Gordon and Nocioni or Morrison long term.

Right now those are the 7 possible #1's, and I would say Morrison's chances are slim. I'm really giving Splitter the benefit of the doubt, because I haven't seen him and isn't all that high on any mocks.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

Without having watched 99% of these prospects, I would go with Aldridge.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Would it be in ours?


I think so 

Deng, Gordon , Hinrich , Chandler, Nocioni and Duhon are all proven pieces who can win on the NBA level and I believe would provide a great supporting cast to Bosh

Supposedly weak draft or not, our 2 picks can result in solid additions (see other threads, and especially if the balls fall for a #1) and at the Knicks pace, we very well may have another high lotto pick in '07. Heck, what does Toronto need that cap space for that they can use that we can't?



> Long term, that may net better results than getting Bosh, as good as he is.


We've got the Knicks pick next year in a pick swap if theirs is presumably better than ours 

We'd be giving up say Aldridge and say Shawne Williams

I'd do that for Bosh 

And the Raps could try and use their room for free agents outright but a more likely path would be trade consolidation with some of the young talent and the availability of cap room to be a major trade player to build around their young core that way


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

Honestly, if the pick is #1, I take Rudy Gay. I'm sure that Armstrong or Splitter would be there with our pick.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

dsouljah9 said:


> Honestly, if the pick is #1, I take Rudy Gay. I'm sure that Armstrong or Splitter would be there with our pick.


 I want this guy


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

spongyfungy said:


> I want this guy



:jump: WE NEED RUDY GAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## step (Sep 19, 2005)

That was a great clip.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Morrison and Gay look like the best choices, Aldridge hasn't impressed me as much, although I still lean his way at times because he is a big man and not only do we need a big man, but good big men are a lot more rare than wing players. Wing players are a dime a dozen. A few good ones come into the league every year. 

Morrison looks electric though. The only question about his game is his athletic ability. Can he keep up at the next level? The pre-draft tests will help us with that. Otherwise, the guy looks really good. There is something to be said for a guy with that kind of game, who you can tell also knows the ins and outs of the game so well, and competes hard and has that fire in him to win ballgames. 

Rudy Gay looks like a Jason Richardson type. 

But the idea to package it with one or two of our young guys for Bosh is the best idea I've heard yet. Unfortunetly, by the time the draft rolls around, he might be too good to be traded for young roleplayers and a great draft pick. Unless Jerry Krause takes over the GM job over there. 

Also, one idea to consider, is to pass up on the pick and take it next year. That should be looked at in the way that the Knicks are pretty much tied up right now, and to make things worse, Larry Brown will probably step down before next season. The logic in doing this would be that the top 2 in next years draft would both easily be #1 in this years draft. And 8 of the top 10 projected are big men.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Wynn said:


> Very interesting question at the top of the thread. I've been advocating drafting big, but if it becomes clear that we can draft a truly special player, regardless of position, I think we go for it. We can still grab the best available big when our own pick comes around. Ultimately if we pull in Przybilla and Al Harrington in FA, we've got all five spots on the floor taken care of with a worthy back-up as well. Our first pick, then, should be for the biggest difference maker on the board. If the pick drops low enough where we are out of that type of range, then we take best big available.


This is my line of thinking as well. I actually like Aldridge and think he's option #1 if the Bulls can get him. But if we are near the top of the board and can't get Aldridge, I say the hell with team needs and get the best talent. 

Then go for team needs, maybe, with the Bulls pick.


----------



## The MAMBA (Jan 6, 2006)

Rudy 'Brokeback Mountain'.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Great clip of Rudy Gay...reminded me of Vinsanity quite a bit. Heck, between seeing that athletic ability and the fact that he's been growing into a consistent player for UConn lately, I wouldn't be opposed to taking him. It might result in a overhaul of our roster slighty (Gordon/Gay in the backcourt, with Hinrich to the bench? Deng off the bench?). But it sounds like he might be worth it.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I just question Gay's heart. Hopefully that will change once he reaches the tournament, but I like to see young talented guys DOMINATE early, like Iverson at Georgetown or Francis at Maryland or Wade at Marquette. However, the talent is definitely there.

I see him being a RJeff type physically, but talentwise, he's got Jefferson's talent as a third-year but lacks RJeff's defensive talent as a rookie. I'll never forget that monster block Jefferson had while he was at Arizona during the tournament that year... he came from the other side of the hoop to reach and stuff the ball out of bounds. Imagine Dr. J's under the hoop layup except in defensive form.

I haven't yet seen Gay's defensive talent, and strong defense is usually most influenced by desire and passion. It's just tough to say. I'd like to see how his intensity is when he gets to the tournament.

I'm a big fan of Calhoun products, though, and so is Paxson. If we take Gay AND Boone then trade Hinrich and Deng for Okafor, maybe we can just pick up Taliek Brown and hire Jim Calhoun.

Or maybe we can trade Hinrich for Battier and Gordon + Noch + Chandler for Brand and see if we can get Jay Williams back on the team, then hire Coach K and start five Dukies.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

spongyfungy said:


> I want this guy



Me too now.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

If we get the chance to get Gay, we pick him. He can get to the FT line. If we can somehow move Deng for Okafor (if he can recover for injuries), we'd have a lineup for the next decade. 

I like Aldridge, but you pick Gay over him. Talent >>> Need. If we have the choice between Gay and Aldridge, lets hope Pax can display what he did two years ago in the draft.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

theanimal23 said:


> Talent >>> Need.


It's not that simple though, in my opinion. 

What is the value of talent if there is a ton of wings around the league who are also talented? Hell, Deng and Nocioni are really good wings. 

We need a big man, just like a ton of teams need a big man. The league needs big men. Aldridge doesn't have to be as talented as Gay to be more valuable. It's positional value. A small forward in this league could be better than a top 5 center, and not even be a top 10 small forward, but since he isn't top 10 at his position and the center is, he'll be outplayed by his opponents more often than the center. 

Not saying we should pick Aldridge, but the fact that he is a big man has to be a huge reason to heavily consider him.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Sir Patchwork said:


> It's not that simple though, in my opinion.
> 
> What is the value of talent if there is a ton of wings around the league who are also talented? Hell, Deng and Nocioni are really good wings.
> 
> ...


I agree with you. I have been in love with Aldridge all year. If the scouts are right about Gay's potential of becoming a star/superstar, I would try to take him and move either Deng/Ben. However, Aldridge should be our prime target. 

I prolly sound like I'm contradicting myself, b/c I'm not sure who to pick, if we had a choice. It would depend on who we purse in FA. If we can somehow get Aldridge, and somehow make a move with only giving up one piece of the core for PP, then we'd be set. 

With our draft pick, I would try to get another big man (Shelden, Splitter, Boone?), if we do not want to overpay for a tweener like Al, or a guy like Nene. In FA, I think we should persue a guy like Posey.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

spongyfungy said:


> I want this guy


Me too!


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

UConn Nova on right now. Watch it, Gay is on, and maybe we can look at Lowry (as a mid 1st rounder)

edit: its on espn


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Aldridge is the obvious choice but Rudy Gay is playing with passion now and has the most upside of any player in this crop. He might be the closest thing to a sure thing in the draft. Which leads me to my ironic comparison for the kid, Len Bias. He has Bias's body, game and scary athletic ability. I also think they are from the same neighborhood if I am not mistaken. Jordan once said the toughest guy he ever went up against was Len Bias. Gay could be that type of player, with an emphasis on player. Just because the comparison is made doesnt mean I think Gay is a coke head, its just that their games are so eerily similar.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

spongyfungy said:


> I want this guy



You cant teach explosiveness, and ****, this kid has that in droves


----------



## MuresansThimble (Nov 16, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> He might be the closest thing to a sure thing in the draft. Which leads me to my ironic comparison for the kid, Len Bias.


yes, much like one's wedding day, when one is already late.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

MuresansThimble said:


> yes, much like one's wedding day, when one is already late.


I dont follow?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> You cant teach explosiveness, and ****, this kid has that in droves


Not to be to confrontational, but so does Josh Smith, Eddie Robinson, Travis Outlaw, etc... Falling in love with pure athleticism has resulted in a lot of bad value picks. 

I'm not saying that Gay will be a bust, just that athleticism alone should not be a reason to draft him in the top 3.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> Not to be to confrontational, but so does Josh Smith, Eddie Robinson, Travis Outlaw, etc... Falling in love with pure athleticism has resulted in a lot of bad value picks.
> 
> I'm not saying that Gay will be a bust, just that athleticism alone should not be a reason to draft him in the top 3.



So did Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Charles Barkley, Dominique Wilkens, Scottie Pippen, James Worthy etc. Its a real nice element to have in your game at almost any spot in the game, IMO. Obviously Gay needs to be judged on more then his athletic ability, or he will end up as the next Kenny Walker. But explosion like that seperates the good players from the great players. 

BTW, not to be confrontational, but Josh Smith and Travis Outlaw are far from busts IMO.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

rlucas4257 said:


> So did Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Charles Barkley, Dominique Wilkens, Scottie Pippen, James Worthy etc. Its a real nice element to have in your game at almost any spot in the game, IMO. Obviously Gay needs to be judged on more then his athletic ability, or he will end up as the next Kenny Walker. But explosion like that seperates the good players from the great players.
> 
> BTW, not to be confrontational, but Josh Smith and Travis Outlaw are far from busts IMO.


But they weren't drafted in the top 3 (and granted they're still young). To be honest, I'm all for gambling for a star -- I just don't think it's fair to judge a player by a highlight clip of his dunks. If Gay has substaintial skills to go a long with his great athleticism I'm all for drafting him. I haven't seen enough of him to make that judgement.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

TripleDouble said:


> But they weren't drafted in the top 3 (and granted they're still young). To be honest, I'm all for gambling for a star -- I just don't think it's fair to judge a player by a highlight clip of his dunks. If Gay has substaintial skills to go a long with his great athleticism I'm all for drafting him. I haven't seen enough of him to make that judgement.


Fair enough.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

rlucas4257 said:


> Aldridge is the obvious choice but Rudy Gay is playing with passion now and has the most upside of any player in this crop. He might be the closest thing to a sure thing in the draft. Which leads me to my ironic comparison for the kid, Len Bias. He has Bias's body, game and scary athletic ability. I also think they are from the same neighborhood if I am not mistaken. Jordan once said the toughest guy he ever went up against was Len Bias. Gay could be that type of player, with an emphasis on player. Just because the comparison is made doesnt mean I think Gay is a coke head, its just that their games are so eerily similar.


It saddens me that I never got to see Bias play.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

Babble-On said:


> It saddens me that I never got to see Bias play.



The kid was a freak and if he had gotten to the NBA, I think the odds were in his favor of a Hall of Fame career. There was nothing he couldnt do.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Gay is stroking it from three.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

I think Gay has all the tools. Only thing is, I don't see that star's swagger from him. It seems like he might be content to be just another guy, which actually might be a plus for pax and skiles. At the same time, he might be one of those guys who aren't able to expose their games to the full extent in college, like maybe Vince Carter and Jason Richardson were.


edit- I wouldn't draft the guy #1, but Armstrong has some nice skills.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Ugly pull up there but that first step is killer.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Babble-On said:


> I think Gay has all the tools. Only thing is, I don't see that star's swagger from him. It seems like he might be content to be just another guy, which actually might be a plus for pax and skiles. At the same time, he might be one of those guys who aren't able to expose their games to the full extent in college, like maybe Vince Carter and Jason Richardson were.
> 
> 
> edit- I wouldn't draft the guy #1, but Armstrong has some nice skills.


Armstrong looks pretty athletic. I wonder how big his reach is. His neck is in Chris Bosh teritory.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

If we got the #1 pick, my pick is easily JJ Reddick. Heck, anywhere 1-6 with that pick, Reddick is the guy I am trying to get. He has star written all over him. Just because you go to hte NBA doesn't mean you can't shoot.....unless your names Kirk Hinrich.

At say 13ish, go after Paul Davis.

Then of course sign Al Harrington, Joel Pryzbilla, and Antonio Davis and trade Hinrich for a Mikael Pietrus.

PG-Ben Gordon/Chris Duhon
SG-JJ Reddick/Mikael Pietrus
SF-Luol Deng/Andres Nocioni
PF-Al Harrington/Paul Davis/Antonio Davis
C- Tyson Chandler/Joel Pryzbilla


----------



## 4door (Sep 5, 2005)

Adam Morrison and Rudy Gay are heads and shoulders above everyone else. Alderage is unimpressive IMO and I have never seen the italian kid. Gay will be a very good player (Micheal Finley is a good comparison) but he doesn't have the drive to be a #1 option on a championship team. Adam Morrison will be great. Mark my words, he won't be Larry Bird, like kobe won't be MJ, but he is damn close. He will be better than Stojakovic. Yes, he is not the best defender in the world because he lacks laterial quickness, but he does have a very high basketball IQ and a desire to win, and won't be plauged with the injury problems of Bird. When you watch him it is easy to see a star, not a college star (like redick) but a superstar in the making. He knows it, and the teams he plays knows it. People were hating on Duncan when he came out too...too small, not strong enough, not much upside, not exciting...but Duncan had "it", and it was easy to see. Morrison is the only player that has "it" and that doesn't come around every year. He HAS TO BE the #1 pick if we can get him. Our pick can go to a big man. Deng might have to move down to SG, which I think will not be as big of an issue that people think.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

4door said:


> Adam Morrison and Rudy Gay are heads and shoulders above everyone else. Alderage is unimpressive IMO and I have never seen the italian kid. Gay will be a very good player (Micheal Finley is a good comparison) but he doesn't have the drive to be a #1 option on a championship team. Adam Morrison will be great. Mark my words, he won't be Larry Bird, like kobe won't be MJ, but he is damn close. He will be better than Stojakovic. Yes, he is not the best defender in the world because he lacks laterial quickness, but he does have a very high basketball IQ and a desire to win, and won't be plauged with the injury problems of Bird. When you watch him it is easy to see a star, not a college star (like redick) but a superstar in the making. He knows it, and the teams he plays knows it. People were hating on Duncan when he came out too...too small, not strong enough, not much upside, not exciting...but Duncan had "it", and it was easy to see. Morrison is the only player that has "it" and that doesn't come around every year. He HAS TO BE the #1 pick if we can get him. Our pick can go to a big man. Deng might have to move down to SG, which I think will not be as big of an issue that people think.


I don't see the high IQ with Morrison. All I see is scoring. A player with a high IQ who draws as much attention as Morrison does should be able to average more than 1.6 assists IMO.


----------



## 4door (Sep 5, 2005)

he should pass more, that is one thing that Bird was very underrated with. But the offense is built around him, so you can't really fault him for not getting many assists. If he averaged 4 assists a game but his team lost because he didn't score enough, I don't see that as being smart. everyone has their own ways of defining "basketball IQ" and I think it is hard to tell with just stats. It is about pacing yourself, understanding when to start a fight just to motivate a team, when to back down, when to taunt when to not taunt, how to work around the weak points of your game, how to win, knowing where the ball is going to be, moving without the ball, knowing how to work within an offense or defense, etc. When I have watched Morrison this season he really has been great, he needs to improve on some aspects, but he works perfectly within that team. He is going to be a very special player, I know many will disagree and will choose an athlete over a player, but Morrison has heart and basketball IQ and he wants to win. i will bet anyone that he will be an all-star in this league.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

You know this draft is bad when people have to compare Morrison to Bird to build up hype.

I say we trade the pick. We need to get older and I don't see Aldrige, Splitter, or whoever, helping us enough.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

giantkiller7 said:


> You know this draft is bad when people have to compare Morrison to Bird to build up hype.
> 
> I say we trade the pick. We need to get older and I don't see Aldrige, Splitter, or whoever, helping us enough.


We need to get older and more talent. We should get older via FA and more talented via the draft.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

TripleDouble said:


> We need to get older and more talent. We should get older via FA and more talented via the draft.


But what FAs are out there, and what prospects in the draft would we be looking at? In any other year maybe, but the draft is so mediocre this year. I don't see any prospects really being what we want.

Can't we do both via a trade--get older and more talented? Are you assuming anyone we get via FA won't be more talented as anyone in the draft, or anyone on our team?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

giantkiller7 said:


> But what FAs are out there, and what prospects in the draft would we be looking at? In any other year maybe, but the draft is so mediocre this year. I don't see any prospects really being what we want.
> 
> Can't we do both via a trade--get older and more talented? Are you assuming anyone we get via FA won't be more talented as anyone in the draft, or anyone on our team?


I don't like this year's FA crop except for depth (and Nene if healthy). I don't think that this draft is as bad as people think. In any case I think there's a lot more talent available in the draft than in FA.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

TripleDouble said:


> I don't like this year's FA crop except for depth (and Nene if healthy). I don't think that this draft is as bad as people think. In any case I think there's a lot more talent available in the draft than in FA.


But who would help us out at #1 overall more than someone we would get for that pick would?


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

giantkiller7 said:


> But who would help us out at #1 overall more than someone we would get for that pick would?


The pick is a gamble but the gamble has a much higher upside than the value of the pick in a trade.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

Two ways to go about it. If we keep the pick, I say we take Aldridge. He's not going to have the best rookie year of all the '06 draftees, but he continues to improve this year. He's putting up big numbers on a good college team, he's a very good athlete, he has size, and he's a good jib guy as far as we know. With our second pick, we go after the best shooting guard left on the board. Carney, Ager? With our free agency money, we go after Nene/Gooden, Salmons, and change. Hopefully Darius accepts his player option, or maybe we have enough cap room left over to give him an extension and a slight raise.

Hinrich, Duhon, 
Gordon, Carney
Deng, Nocioni
Gooden, Songalia, Sweetney
Chandler, Aldridge, Harrington

If we have some plan to trade Luol Deng, we could go for Rudy Gay or Morrison as well as Aldridge, but preferably Gay. I want some players who play above the rim on this team, and that's Rudy. His game looks like it should translate to the NBA with no real problems. Morrison is more of a risk, although the reward possibility is clearly high with him. 

If we trade Deng, Thomas, Duhon, and our #1 for Pierce and LaFrentz, go after Nazr, Wright, or Elson with the MLE. Wright will probably command a bit more than the MLE, but if he's our guy, maybe we throw it all at him. Nazr is a more likely target, and Elson might be a steal.

Hinrich, (Gordon)
Pierce, Gordon
Nocioni, Gay
Chandler, Songaila, Sweetney
Nazr, LaFrentz, Harrington


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

Rudy Gay looked very good out there, his best basketball is still far ahead of him. His defense is very good, I'm not sure how people get the impression that he dogs it on that end. He's averaging 2 steals and blocks a game while challenging shots and crashing the boards.

Hilton Armstrong showed off a sweet jumper and a few between-the-legs dribbles. Where the Hell did that come from? His stock could be top 10 by the end of a year...for a senior who averages 9,7,3. That's insane...but his improvement can't be ignored.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

Like A Breath said:


> Hilton Armstrong showed off a sweet jumper and a few between-the-legs dribbles. Where the Hell did that come from? His stock could be top 10 by the end of a year...for a senior who averages 9,7,3. That's insane...but his improvement can't be ignored.


He was very impressive today. I don't think he'll break the top 10 or even lottery, but probably right outside of that. It's nice to think with our pick, the worst case scenario is a guy like him.


----------



## The ROY (Nov 11, 2004)

We need RUDY GAY

we got enough damn jump shooters on our team...

let's get some damn athlete's with STAR potential...


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

Darius Miles Davis said:


> Two ways to go about it. If we keep the pick, I say we take Aldridge. He's not going to have the best rookie year of all the '06 draftees, but he continues to improve this year. He's putting up big numbers on a good college team, he's a very good athlete, he has size, and he's a good jib guy as far as we know. With our second pick, we go after the best shooting guard left on the board. Carney, Ager? With our free agency money, we go after Nene/Gooden, Salmons, and change. Hopefully Darius accepts his player option, or maybe we have enough cap room left over to give him an extension and a slight raise.
> 
> Hinrich, Duhon,
> Gordon, Carney
> ...


That team nets us a second round exit for a few years, but no Championships and no real way to add the players to put us over the top. We essentially end up in the same position with no Frontcourt to speak of. Chandler can not be counted on right now to be more than a defensive presence. Nazr is nice, but again, no offensive game. 3 on five, shooting from the outside is what we have now.

Give me Gay (at #3) and Splitter (at #11) in the draft. Go hard after Harrington, Nene or Gooden and we are really a deep stacked team.

While Harrington isn't isn't my dream PF he would be a good upgrade over what we have right now. I think he's good on defense, better than avereage on the offensive end. He's the one I really think we can get in FA.

Gooden is better on the defensive end and is more of a true power forward that can really solidify what we need at the PF position. His offensive game is competent and overall he would give us a boost over what we have now.

Nene, if healthy is the guy I'd throw the most money at. The reason is simple. Offensively and defensively he can truly be a Center or PF. He is athletic, on the upswing and really is looking to explode. His inside presence would be huge on both ends and combine him with Chandler and we improve in the post area on both ends dramatically.

Again, if Pax and JR are willing to overpay, we can really play the draft aggressive. We don't HAVE to get two big men in the draft or even the best big man with the Knicks pick. We really have a lot fo options to fill the gaping holes we have IF we don't make a stupid trade for a player who costs us our cap space and a pick and player. That, IMO, would lock us into mediocrity for a long time.

We went from the Best Ever to absolutely horrible for way too long, we deserve a right to shoot to the top and this is likely to be our best opportunity for the next 5 years. If not, rebuilding plan 78 will take another 5-7 of unwatchabull basketball.


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

TripleDouble said:


> The pick is a gamble but the gamble has a much higher upside than the value of the pick in a trade.


I agree but I guess I just feel like if we could get some inside scoring and experience in the same move, i'd be all for that. i feel like another youngster won't do much but make us more confused. As long as we also add experience in another way.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

The ROY said:


> We need RUDY GAY
> 
> we got enough damn jump shooters on our team...
> 
> let's get some damn athlete's with STAR potential...


This may set us back a year, but I think we should trade Deng and our pick for Gay. Lets hope the NYk pick can give us Aldridge.

We got no one who attacks the rim, or can get to the FT line. I don't want to hear the crap that the Refs are out to get us. You gain the Refs respect by attacking the rim. This is why we see the other team attempt 35 FTs to our 15 FTs. Gay will can fill that void.

Aldridge is a big man with an array of offensive skills. 

If we did this, we would be set back one year, but be set for the next five. In FA, lets try to get Gooden. If we get Aldridge, I don't want Nene. We would have to overpay Nene, and Ty and Aldridge should be the starters. Gooden can buy time for Aldridge, and come a lot cheaper. I would also try to get Posey, and some guys for some change, like Nazr. 

Hinrich/Duhon
Gordon/Posey
Gay/Noce
Gooden/Songalia
Tyson/Aldridge/Nazr


----------



## giantkiller7 (Feb 9, 2006)

I agree we would have to pay Nene and IMO it wouldn't be worth it. He's the exact type ofplayer that Pax would be all over but wouldn't amount to much. Nazr is a complete beast on the boards. I love him but we may have to overpay him and ultimately I don't know if it's worth it because Tyson is basically developing into a clone of him. Posey looks great attacking the basket and is just the kind of athlete we need, good idea. Aldrige IMO would ultimately end up playing PF, we would need more depth there anyway.

My only worry with Gay is that Skiles will pull one of his vendettas with him if he's not working hard enough, or if he acts like he doesn't care, which is the knock on him. It could unfortunately turn into a TT type of situation.

I like your plan and how you brought up players other than those normally mentioned, but I think we need a more experienced vet as well. I'd love to get AD back, heck even as a coach, or like what the Mavs did with Avery Johnson last year--as an inactive player who is more or less a coach.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

Rudy Gay would be the logical choice if we have the #1 pick. He is a slasher, and on a team full of jumpshooters, that is something that we need.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

I don't think anyone is necessarily guilty of this, but we definately shouldn't rule out Rodney Carney (over Gay). He has raised his FG% to 44% and is shooting 41% from behind the 3-pt arc. Carney is also probably the better fit for us, especially if we do something like the Duhon for Gooden deal.

Backcourt of Hinrich, Gordon, Carney & Pargo looks solid, especially as Ben begins to take on more PG responsibilities. I don't think Ben will ever be a full time point, but he definately has shown improvement in this area and probably be counted on to run the offense 10mpg or so next season I would imagine.

Wings of Deng/Nocioni/Carney

Frontcourt of Chandler, Gooden, FA signing of Nene/Nazr/Przy, Othella, Sweets, and either our own draft pick or a re-signed Darius Songaila (depending on who needs to be included in a Gooden deal, or assuming no trades).

This looks like a solid draft strategy if Aldridge or Williams either aren't available or don't live up to expectations in pre-draft workouts.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Forgive me of my Ingorance, but how good are Bargani? and Splitter?

Btw, does anyone have a website of the list of FA's available this summer? I couldn't find one on hoopshype/realgm.

Are there any other good sites to read about the draft, other than nbadraft.net?

THANKS


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> Forgive me of my Ingorance, but how good are Bargani? and Splitter?


They will be awesome -- guaranteed to come in and produce immediately and at a high level.

Unless another team drafts them. If that happens, they probably won't be that good.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> They will be awesome -- guaranteed to come in and produce immediately and at a high level.
> 
> Unless another team drafts them. If that happens, they probably won't be that good.


Or, conversly, visa versa.


----------



## r1terrell23 (Feb 11, 2006)

With our first pick take Rudy, with our second pick take Shelden.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

This question may be worth another thread (based of the title of this one), but WHAT IF we had the WORSE LUCK, and the NYK pick is a late lottery pick, and our pick (if we miss the playoffs) is a late lottery pick? What do we do?


----------

