# Time to start thinking about the draft.....



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

or a trade. We simply do not have consistent guard play. This team is crying out for a dead eye from the perimeter and we have nobody that can do it game in and game out. Marbury and Crawford are both under 40% and neither can be counted on to nail an open look. On top of that, we can't stop anyone. There is a kid at SU that might be available as a 2nd round pick and could really help. It might require a 1st if he keeps blowing up. Dimetris Nichols is 6'8...long, and very athletic......great defender...excellent DEEP shooter with a newfound midrange game. Handle needs improvement to play a 2 in the nba. Averaging roughly 25 over his last 5 or 6 games. Needs to be mentally tougher but may have solved that if the season so far is an indicator.

As far as trades, who is available? I know Bibby is, but does he help? Any ideas?


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

I don't have the knowledge to make a suggestion in terms of drafting the college kids or anyone overseas, but I will take a stab at a trade. I don't know if Bibby is available, but we really need to make another move. I would not hesitate to part with someone like Nate Robinson and it's pretty obvious I would love to get rid of the bloated contracts on the bench but that is next to impossible. If we can get rid of Nate now, before folks realize he is just a side show I'm all for it. Will anyone be willing to part with Frye if the "right" deal comes along?


----------



## thatsnotgross (Dec 4, 2006)

2 things the Knicks need... Kittyhawk was right one on of them.

1.) Deadeye shooter
2.) Perimeter defense

I believe at the rate we're going we will be dead last on opponent's 3pt FG shooting for the 3rd year in a row.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Sort of a dilema for me...*

As you know, I'm a huge Frye fan from last year. The troouble is, he and Lee really play the same position. If Lee is chasing perimeter guys around, his rebounding will suffer, so he really needs to play the PF. Frye can play the 5 and is, in fact, pretty good there. That leaves 96 minutes for 3 guys. Since we need to have Curry play 35+, it means either Lee will have to find out how to play the 3 effectively or someone either sits, or gets traded. I like all three guys. Maybe I trade Frye for Artest, if they take either Francis or Steph.

I think this would work.....Artest and Bibby for Frye, Nate, and Marbury. Solves our problems at defense and shooting. I would also do Artest and Douby for Frye, Nate, and Q.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: Sort of a dilema for me...*



alphaorange said:


> As you know, I'm a huge Frye fan from last year. The troouble is, he and Lee really play the same position. If Lee is chasing perimeter guys around, his rebounding will suffer, so he really needs to play the PF. Frye can play the 5 and is, in fact, pretty good there. That leaves 96 minutes for 3 guys. Since we need to have Curry play 35+, it means either Lee will have to find out how to play the 3 effectively or someone either sits, or gets traded. I like all three guys. Maybe I trade Frye for Artest, if they take either Francis or Steph.
> 
> I think this would work.....Artest and Bibby for Frye, Nate, and Marbury. Solves our problems at defense and shooting. I would also do Artest and Douby for Frye, Nate, and Q.


Artest + Bibby for Frye Nate and Stevie I try to do. If it doesn't work then I wouldn't hesitate to make it Marbury instead. Artest is the type of 3 man we need.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

the guards are inconsistent because they are hurt, and the ones avalable are being worked to the bone , no need to overeact about it , 

if i were to do a trade though , i would start with the team's absolute lack of inside defensive presence when kelvin cato is off the floor.

my solution is tyson chandler, linton johnson and the hornets 1st rd. pick for david lee , malik rose and the pick the knicks wind up with out of the eddy curry trade.


lee's rebounding is replaced by chandler's who is actually avg. more boards in more minutes in n.o. but you also gain his ability to close down the paint for stretches of time , but may have to suffer through his very mediocre ability to finish in the paint, and his below avg. hands, whereas lee is now 2nd in the league in fg% showing how good he is at that.

the knicks are absorbing tyson's contract in which he is generally thought to be too much while getting a very underpriced Lee at his rookie deal for over the next 2 and a half seasons ...they do however have to take malik for the salaries to match, all in all they are getting a good bit or production for their dollar. while the knicks will be taking an overinflated deal for a slightly lesser player , evened out by the draft swap between the 2 teams.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

Yeah but giving up lee.........I dunno.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Bad move....*

That would give us 2 big guys clogging the paint. Just another big guy to double Curry and render him useless. Lee is much better than Chandler in all ways except shot blocking, which although we could use, it's not our biggest problem by far. Lee is more active, a better offensive rebounder, a better passer, and still has a huge upside. Chandler is about topped out.

You defense of the guards in inexplicable. Marbury has NEVER been a good perimeter shooter (last year notwithstanding), and JC is not consistent either. You could live with one guy being that way, but if both guys are struggling, its an automatic "L". Since Marbury has been a Knick I have not seen any stretch of more than 6-8 games where he plays very well. Then its several games of far below par play. Whether or not the guards have been hurt (and I don't think JC has been), they have mostly sucked. Francis is probably never going to come close to his past play and Marbury is getting old. Even he says that back to backs are going to kill him. Since the rest of the team is young, why would you want to build around him if you can move him? This team is 2-3 years away from being a yearly contender. Where do you think Marbury will be at that time, health and ability wise?

I have read that both Bibby and Artest are available. If they could be secured giving up some combo of Marbury, Frye, Q, and Nate (and I can't really think they could), why would you not do it?

Curry
Lee
Artest
Bibby
Collins?

JJ/Cato
jeffries/Rose
Balkman
JC/ Francis

I fully expect Stevie to retire early due to injury


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Grinch...*

Just compared Lee to Chandler and have come to the conclusion that you are delusional. At 1.54 blocks he is only a block a game better than Lee and he pales big time in every other category except boards. No offensive threat at all and he shoots 36% from the line. I gotta believe you're all alone on this one.......


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Truknicksfan said:


> Yeah but giving up lee.........I dunno.


I keep telling you Tru, Grinch is actually Isiah Thomas...that's why he hates Lee. :lol:


----------



## The Future7 (Feb 24, 2005)

*Re: Bad move....*



alphaorange said:


> That would give us 2 big guys clogging the paint. Just another big guy to double Curry and render him useless. Lee is much better than Chandler in all ways except shot blocking, which although we could use, it's not our biggest problem by far. Lee is more active, a better offensive rebounder, a better passer, and still has a huge upside. Chandler is about topped out.
> 
> You defense of the guards in inexplicable. Marbury has NEVER been a good perimeter shooter (last year notwithstanding), and JC is not consistent either. You could live with one guy being that way, but if both guys are struggling, its an automatic "L". Since Marbury has been a Knick I have not seen any stretch of more than 6-8 games where he plays very well. Then its several games of far below par play. Whether or not the guards have been hurt (and I don't think JC has been), they have mostly sucked. Francis is probably never going to come close to his past play and Marbury is getting old. Even he says that back to backs are going to kill him. Since the rest of the team is young, why would you want to build around him if you can move him? This team is 2-3 years away from being a yearly contender. Where do you think Marbury will be at that time, health and ability wise?
> 
> ...


I would love to see this happen. Bibby is very consistent with his production. Artest would be great for our lack of Defense. Lee would be getting the minutes he deserves. I think Curry would do better with Bibby and Collins in the backcourt.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Grinch...*



alphaorange said:


> Just compared Lee to Chandler and have come to the conclusion that you are delusional. At 1.54 blocks he is only a block a game better than Lee and he pales big time in every other category except boards. No offensive threat at all and he shoots 36% from the line. I gotta believe you're all alone on this one.......



no what i am is someone who knows much more about basketball than you.

you love to yammer on about how i know nothing about stats and than want to simplify lee's ability over chandler by stating a single stat .

but you want a complete statistical comparison i'll give it to you.

chandler grades out to be a slightly better rebounder (he garners a greater % of boards available to him...a far better indicator of rebounding ability than just rebounds a game , which is an advantage chandler still holds)....he manages this while actually leaving his man to block shots , so basically if he did what lee tends to do when a guard drives the lane which is offer little to no resistance because he doesn't want to give up his rebounding position , the margin would be even greater.

their ability to convert shots is closer than you are willing to admit, chandler's fg% is .628 vs. lee's .625.

no he cant hit a free throw this year but he has been able to in the past over their short career's chandler's ft% is .602 vs lee's .652...not exactly mark price vs. chris dudley here.

and the major reason you are showing your ignorance is because the knicks aren't losing because they cant score , a far better indicator of their losses is they cant defend as well as they should due various factors. Lee really is not a guy that wins you games, he helps win, he is what he is a combo forward who rebounds and finishes well , but a guy who averages 10 and 10 with sub par defense is always replacable , but right now lee's value is abnormally high , it would be a smart time to cash in on him .



david lee is many good things , he hustles , he boards and he can finish , he can even make a move or 2 in the post and he has a decent jumpshot ...but as long as curry is the centerpiece lee will always be better off coming off the bench , because he doesn't have the ability to D up the league's top players at his position , or defend the lane against the opposing guards who are constantly gaining entrance to the lane. chandler does .

people have a problem with making lee into more than he is. 

lee is no offensive monster he just converts his attempts at a high % , and if he is fouled has recently learned to hit FT's.

add all this plus the hornets pick(right now in the top 10, although i expect it to improve ) and despite the fact that i agree david lee is the better player , i think a trade for chandler is far more practical than keeping lee.

i have far more faith that next year zeke drafting about 10 spots ahead of where he currently is (#23 if the season ended today, and also if the season ended today the knicks would be picking 7th with this trade)will get a very good player in the 8-15, a better player than he can get if he were to keep the pick which is based on the bulls record.

the end result is this, slightly better rebounding , much better defense and a significantly better player in next year's draft .

if you dont like that, you are delusional.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i dont hate lee at all i like lee , but i am realistic about him . he is too small to be a fulltime 4 unless he adopts a ben wallace mentality to defense , he doesn't really defend post up 4's or the lane well , how many above .500 teams can you think of that start a 4 with those attributes who isn't their star player?

my guess is none.1 or 2 at the most...but most likely with special circumstances.

its just something winning teams have , and lee just doesn't provide it.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*If you are so smart......*

How's that Francis/Marbury backcourt thing workin' out? I don't think I'd be going very far out on a limb to say nearly every trade discussion with the Knicks includes questions about the availability of Lee while I don't ever hear people looking for Chandler. Why is that? Stats don't tell much of a story in this case (and seldom tell the real story) and I didn't go into the intangibles that Lee brings that Tyson does not because I figured even you would recognize them.....my bad. The next time you are right about player evaluaton/team chemistry issues will be your first. Am I wrong? Refresh my memory.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

I am a huge syracuse fan and demitrius nichols has been outstanding thiseason,improving his stats from last season by a greta margin,i do however fear that if he continues this play that he will be a mid-late first round pick (as SF with a good 3 point shot are a valuable commodity nowadays) and therefore out of the knicks reach


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: If you are so smart......*

do you need other people to cosign your opinions to know they have value?....i dunno, sounds like your internet insecurity poking out .

but whatever man , and while your thinking up some ill tempered rant, do me a favor and tell me of all the intangibles lee brings that tyson doesn't...because i can gve you one tyson provides that david doesn't , trust in teammates on the defensive end, its harder to play defense on the perimeter when you dont have faith that your teammates will back you up ...but thats something people figure out when they are teenagers playing the game ...i'm guessing thats something you never bothered to do as youngster , just sat on the sidelines making corny remarks huh?


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Whats your deal, man.....*

Started as a nice productive thread and you jumped all over me. I don't mind disagreeing..obviously. I can assure you that I don't need you or anyone else to agree with me. You are opinionated...yes, as I am. But to assert you know more about basketball than I do is an utterly stupid statement since you have no idea of what I know or how I learned it, nor do you know if I played, where I played, or at what level. I have no problem letting my opinions speak for themselves and admit readily when I am wrong. Hell, I've even credited you with being right. 

I' try to educate you. Lee is a splendid role player and every team needs these guys. If you think he can't or won't develop into a good defensive player you are again wrong. The guy hardly played last year and you are belittling his defense. Smart, very smart. You also ignore his FT improvement. My guess he will eventually be an 80% guy. Lee has every bit the chance of being a 18/12 guy and how many guys in the league are? Not to mention his high FG% and suberb passing skills. Chandler has zero chance of those #. Rant on, my man.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

USSKittyHawk said:


> I keep telling you Tru, Grinch is actually Isiah Thomas...that's why he hates Lee. :lol:


No, Grinch is actually Jerry Krause. That's why he wants to see all 3C (JC, Curry, TC) under the same roof once again.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

lgtwins said:


> No, Grinch is actually Jerry Krause. That's why he wants to see all 3C (JC, Curry, TC) under the same roof once again.


I was just going to comment on that. Asking Tyson to defend the PF position next to Curry isn't something that is going to work


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

id give up q-rich and nate the jerk in exchange for artest and quincy douby 

in fact i`d give up any of q-rich,frye,jeffries to get ron

Basically im sure something is amiss in sac-town and to be brutally honest i think ron has been dogging it in the hopes of getting moved 

Was it a coincedence that soon as they play the knicks and NYC(read: QB,155th,etc) is watching that ron suddenly explodes,he`s a big reputation guy and does`nt want to look bad in front of his boys,im sure that if he came to the knicks he`d be an all star again


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

What is everyones sudden love for artest? Did you guys all forget what a headach he is? Hes too risky for the knicks. Suppose he dosnt like the NY media, and plays like garbage and demands a trade or something. Then the knicks just lost good players that they traded and just gave them MORE distractions and ended up dooming this team more then it is already.

RON = TOO MUCH OF A HEAD CASE FOR NEW YORK! ARENT YOU GUYS LEARNING SOMETHING ABOUT HEADCASES WITH NATE?!?! Guess not......

(You guys see an all-star for this team, I see Jalen Rose all over again.)


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

Truknicksfan said:


> Suppose he dosnt like the NY media, and plays like garbage and demands a trade or something.


Suppose he plays like the best man to man defender in the nba that he is (and puts up 18-20 a game) and enjoys himself because he`s home again

i`d take ron in a heartbeat,q-rich is never gonna be healthy,jeffries just looks awkward and offensivly challenged

marbury
crawford
artest
lee
curry


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

www.starbury.com said:


> Suppose he plays like the best man to man defender in the nba that he is (and puts up 18-20 a game) and enjoys himself because he`s home again
> 
> i`d take ron in a heartbeat,q-rich is never gonna be healthy,jeffries just looks awkward and offensivly challenged
> 
> ...


I'm with you Starbury, I'll take Ronnie in a minute. Yea he is a headcase, but we need some tough guys on this team.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Sort of a dilema for me...*



alphaorange said:


> As you know, I'm a huge Frye fan from last year. The troouble is, he and Lee really play the same position. If Lee is chasing perimeter guys around, his rebounding will suffer, so he really needs to play the PF. Frye can play the 5 and is, in fact, pretty good there. That leaves 96 minutes for 3 guys. Since we need to have Curry play 35+, it means either Lee will have to find out how to play the 3 effectively or someone either sits, or gets traded. I like all three guys. Maybe I trade Frye for Artest, if they take either Francis or Steph.
> 
> I think this would work.....Artest and Bibby for Frye, Nate, and Marbury. Solves our problems at defense and shooting. I would also do Artest and Douby for Frye, Nate, and Q.



Why would a team give up two all-star caliber player for a good player in Frye that likely will never be a superstar or perennial all-star for that matter, nothing more than a highlight reel in Nate and a guy with tendenitis in both knees (Marbury)? Sounds as though that trade is pretty one sided. I think your second proposal of Artest and Douby for Frye, Nate and Q might be more realistic but then again, why give up young players if we're not competing for a title anyway? Artest is a star that should put you into title contention. For a team that's clearly rebuilding, it wouldn't make sense to give up these players especially because Artest is a destructive influence. I like your chain of thought though because it's clear you see the two main issues that bother the Knicks, defense and perimeter shooting. Knowing that, I'd be willing to move Channing Frye and Jamal Crawford for Richard Jefferson and Josh Boone. Jefferson is a solid perimeter defender and one of the better scorers in the league along the baseline where we get very little production. Frye helps the Nets address big men issues especially with Krstic hurt as of right now. I think it's a win win because we get bigger and better defensively.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Grinch...*



alphaorange said:


> Just compared Lee to Chandler and have come to the conclusion that you are delusional. At 1.54 blocks he is only a block a game better than Lee and he pales big time in every other category except boards. No offensive threat at all and he shoots 36% from the line. I gotta believe you're all alone on this one.......


If I were you, I wouldn't call anyone delusional. I know your not one that's very big on stats, so you should not even bring Chandler's blocks per game into this equation. It's not important how many blocks he has during a game but the number of shot's he changes from being very active a defender. Considering team's regularly run a lay up line on us, a guy like Chandler would be emmensely benefitial to our team. We would still have issues shooting the ball but at least we'd be better on the other end of the floor. An old timer like yourself would be the first to mention that "defense win's games" so I'm not so sure why your opposed to this deal. At the very least, we still have Frye on the bench to substitute in at both the 4 and 5 spots. I have to admit though that I'd look to avoid moving David Lee at all costs. I'd perfer to give up Frye in this deal but I see the Grinch's purpose of opting to move Lee. Maybe we could try and pry Rasual Butler away in that deal. I like his ability to shoot on the perimeter.

Just to add some ideas of players we could acquire, how about Martell Webster? He was a deft shooter out of high school and is pretty big enough and fast enough not to be a liability on the other end of the floor. I'm not sure what the Blazers would want in any deal involving him but I would give it a try.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

USSKittyHawk said:


> I'm with you Starbury, I'll take Ronnie in a minute. Yea he is a headcase, but we need some tough guys on this team.


Yeah,ron would have knocked melo`s punk *** out for that cheap shot on mardy

jeffries made an effort but like his recent play it was`nt up to scratch


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Twink....*

My post was well thought out, I assure you. The kings may consider it because they are shopping both of these guys. Bibby has an early termination clause and Artest is not going to re-sign (by all accounts). Since he is not the kind of guy you want to have around when he is unhappy, you move him. There wasn't a huge market last time, what makes you think there would be now? Bibby is overpaid and is not likely to have tons of suitors. The Knicks do it because Artest is likely to be more settled in NY than any other city. Supposition, but reasonable. He is also young, strong, and has a history of durability. Every addition has risks, whether it is via draft, or trade. I consider this worth the gamble with the possibility of ramping up the timetable to contender.

As far as your second post, more drivel. I am well known for placing minimal importance for stats, unless they are qualified in a real, meaningful way. My point is that 1.54 blocks does not EVER describe a full time player as a shotblocker. That could be the case if the player was so damned dominant that no one ever dared to challenge him, but that has never been Tyson, has it? So you would give up a guy that seems destined to put up rarified stats and also has the ability to become a very solid defender for a guy that has never been dominant in any way? Makes no sense. Lee is also the far better OFFENSIVE rebounder, which is even more important to a team that doesn't shoot well. Lee can be an allstar. Think Chandler can? You know why Chandler only plays 30+ minutes? Constant foul trouble. I do agree that defense wins titles, but a shotblocker on a team with no perimeter defenders would either have to challenge fewer shots or be on the bench with fouls. Martell Webster? The guy has done nothing. On a team with little talent at the 2, he hasn't been able to contribute much. Our second year forward is top ten in rebounding, a great passer, top 10 fg%, and really a guy that just makes plays and helps the team win. Chandler? Not so much.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Correction....*

MARGINALLY better offensive rebounder(Lee).


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

*Re: Twink....*



alphaorange said:


> Bibby is overpaid and is not likely to have tons of suitors.


i disagree,

bibby is one of the better point guards in the league and if he became available a LOT of teams would chase him


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*He is good....*

But he is not worth his salary. Teams will look but the trend is pass first PGs right now, which he is not. He does fit Isiah's concept of team structure, however.


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

*Two Knick WINS (Blazer & Sonics).

The Knicks, Lakers, and the Utah Jazz supposed to have the same NBA record (above 500%), 
The Jazz has 23 WINS now, the Lakers have 22 WINS now, the Magic & Cavs have 20 WINS now.* 

When you compare the Roster on those teams to the Knicks Roster, somehow the Knicks Roster on paper are better and should have the advantage on those teams WIN/LOST column. 
So Isiah and his coaching staff has alot to do with why this Knick team is leading to "23" Loses before "23" WINS *(23-59).*


----------



## Kiyaman (Aug 14, 2006)

If Coach Isiah Thomas (and his coaching staff) would get his Starting-5 lineup together (steady same players) than this Knick Team would not have to worry about comming from behind each game.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Whats your deal, man.....*



alphaorange said:


> Started as a nice productive thread and you jumped all over me. I don't mind disagreeing..obviously. I can assure you that I don't need you or anyone else to agree with me. You are opinionated...yes, as I am. But to assert you know more about basketball than I do is an utterly stupid statement since you have no idea of what I know or how I learned it, nor do you know if I played, where I played, or at what level. I have no problem letting my opinions speak for themselves and admit readily when I am wrong. Hell, I've even credited you with being right.
> 
> I' try to educate you. Lee is a splendid role player and every team needs these guys. If you think he can't or won't develop into a good defensive player you are again wrong. The guy hardly played last year and you are belittling his defense. Smart, very smart. You also ignore his FT improvement. My guess he will eventually be an 80% guy. Lee has every bit the chance of being a 18/12 guy and how many guys in the league are? Not to mention his high FG% and suberb passing skills. Chandler has zero chance of those #. Rant on, my man.



nice to see you have a victim complex to a situation you actually started .

in post 8 of this thread you refferred to me as "delusional "

a few posts later you tried to call me out ,and several times you have posted all i know is stats , if that isn't asserting you know more than me , or at the very least i dont know much about basketball ...then what is it.

dont play the victim with me , if you cant handle this being thrown back at you , then maybe in the future you should post in a more respectful manner to the posters in this forum, myself included. 

all about a situation you dont have a leg to stand on .

at no point did i say lee wasn't a good player in fact i have said he is , but he doesn't fix any knick flaws , namely their lack of interior defense , and at the 3 he is a lil' slow .

he scores a few more points than chandler but its not like he's an offensive option the knicks look to go to anymore than sparcely. and they shoot about the same from the field.

FYI chandler has had several stretches in which he has been productive on the offensive side of the ball ...moreso than Lee his 2nd season he avg. 9.2 points in 24.4 minutes, while lee averages 10.7 in 30.3 min. ,so claiming he cant score on lee's level is simply incorrect , he just doesn't focus on it , but the ability is there with more touches.

all the while he has the ability to close down the lane and rebound better than lee....and about potential Tyson is only about 6 months older is 7'1 or 7'2 and a better athlete , if any1 has more potential its him , like curry his career basically stagnated the moment bill cartwright was removed and at that point he was easily the better player out of him and curry...curry's has jumpstarted this season under Thomas , i dont see why under aquirre and thomas the same couldn't happen for Tyson .

but since you have a problem with me saying Lee's defense is subpar .

is he a good defender?

does he play good defense on his man no matter who he is ?

does he defend the lane adequately ?

the answer to all three of those questions is no and you full well know it ...if it weren't no , then he would start when the team is healthy , but as it is now his defense is so far behind jared and channing that his better offense cant get him in the starting lineup , thats why Zeke doesn't even think of him as a starter nor should he , If Lee would accept this responsibility and now whine that he doesn't know why he cant start over channing & jeffries when Thomas numerous times has said it was defense...or his lack of it.

if all things were equal lee may well be worthy , but its not , he has a center who doesn't really defend the lane well either so its a matter of changing Lee or curry if that flaw is ever going to be fixed in the near future....and Curry has been averaging about 22 points a game over his last 24 or so games ...so its not him ...so that leaves lee.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*You give yourself far too much credit....*

I am nobody's victim, never was, and certainly not the likes of you....lmao. My stance on using unqualified stats is clear and well documented. I never said all you know is stats, but I may have said you don't know much. Actually Lee is getting to be a decent defender, not a sieve like he was. He also has allstar potential, Chandler does not, and you never trade an allstar for a role player. You say the dumbest things....like because Lee and Chandler scored similarly in their second years, they have similar offensive capabilities. Now THAT'S the kind of moronic statistical analysis I'm talking about. Lee is what? The 4th option. Chandler with Curry were given a much bigger role. When was the last play you saw run for Lee? Lee is a better shooter, a better passer, a better ball handler....just simply better offensively, by a huge margin. Deny that and you have zero credibility. Rebounding is close, but I like Lee's work better. He pursues the ball and rebounds even at the 3.

Like I said, everyone loves Lee's game but I don't hear anyone clamoring for Tyson. He's a good role player but nothing more. I have no problem with the way people respond, as long as they offer something with substance. I will say this again...you're analysis is ...ah....lacking. I am watching and reading and patiently waiting for you to be on top of the next situation regarding personnel and strategic analysis.....(tough to type that with a straight face).


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

oh no brother. dont even think bout it.

we ain't partin with brandon roy, u gotta get ur own.


----------



## CocaineisaHelluvaDrug (Aug 24, 2006)

NewAgeBaller said:


> oh no brother. dont even think bout it.
> 
> we ain't partin with brandon roy, u gotta get ur own.


WTF are u talkin bout ??


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

You don't trade Lee unless you get an upgrade at his position. You don't trade him if Curry is staying.

Period.

You trade frye.


----------

