# Forget Rasheed



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

As per the Post Portland has already said NY has nothing they want.

http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/45140.htm

Unless a 3rd team comes to our rescue (highly doubtful) We will not see Rasheed playing for the Knicks.


----------



## rickyricardo (Jan 24, 2004)

*damn*

that s a shame we really could have used Rasheed. Marbury needs somebody who can play above the rim and run with him. Van horn got no hops, Houston got no heart to go there, Mutombo is too old, and Kurt Thomas I don t even know what he is. Rashhed will make the city run to MSG and enjoy the game cuz frankly I don t buy a ticket to see Kurt, othella or anderson who doesn t even play now. I want excitement, i want somebody who makes mne fight the referee mentally cuz i am so excited. Rasheed can deliver and Knicks need him.


----------



## Siouxperior (Jan 15, 2003)

I hate to say WE told you so!!! 

Holla:laugh:


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

dump KVH, Houston and Penny, a good thought for Knicks.


----------



## AFunk4Life (Jan 10, 2003)

The Knicks do not need a cancer on the team like RaWEED Wallace. He is the reason Portland sucks this year, his attitude and the team's lack of effort. He does not even care where he plays cause to him its only about the money. And he even said that! Why would Knicks fans want this loser on their team?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>AFunk4Life</b>!
> The Knicks do not need a cancer on the team like RaWEED Wallace. He is the reason Portland sucks this year, his attitude and the team's lack of effort. He does not even care where he plays cause to him its only about the money. And he even said that! Why would Knicks fans want this loser on their team?


I don't know why Rasheed's suddenly the difference between this Blazers team and the past half-dozen or so he's led into the playoffs, and in a couple cases to the WC Finals. Maybe he's suddenly a worse attitude, or a worse player, and you're right about him being a cancer.

Or maybe he's the same Rasheed: a good player, a good defender, but not a superstar. And maybe the team's weaker this year with the departure of Sabonis and Pippen and Bonzi Wells. In which case you'd be wrong.

Ed O.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

id take him, but why the hell would the blazers take our crappy big contract guys?


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

I think you guys mean, he would run with marybury, when he felt like playing har' not all the time.


----------



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

Well in all honesty I think Rasheed will be a Blazer at the end of the season. I'm sorry but Nash was an idiot crackhead GM when he was with NJ and he is once again showing everyone his futility.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Knicks have comparable talent to offer up for Wallace but Nash didn't pull the trigger for Jamison either. He expects top talent for Rasheed or the farm and let's be honest here he is trying to pawn off a basketcase!! 

Rasheed is much more talented than Randolph, so why then is Rasheed on the block???? Because he is a problem!!! We didn't get equal value for Spree for the same reason.

Nash is trying to trade off his problems for top flight talent and it just isn't going to happen. There maybe only 2-3 teams interested in taking Wallace and none of them have talent for talent trades to offer. So expect Rasheed to finish the year in Portland. Where he goes from there is anyone's guess but if I were him I wouldn't want to play somewhere I'm not wanted.

He maybe the next Juwan Howard as far as salary goes.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Knicks have comparable talent to offer up for Wallace but Nash didn't pull the trigger for Jamison either. He expects top talent for Rasheed or the farm and let's be honest here he is trying to pawn off a basketcase!!


Let's be honest, Antawn Jamison has a horrible contract. It's not about talent. It's about contracts and money. The Blazers would rather lose Wallace and get nothing in return than get back a fat contract stapled to a player that's not even an all-star. *They're rebuilding.*


----------



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> Let's be honest, Antawn Jamison has a horrible contract. It's not about talent. It's about contracts and money. The Blazers would rather lose Wallace and get nothing in return than get back a fat contract stapled to a player that's not even an all-star. *They're rebuilding.*


I would love to see if they are willing to let Rasheed just walk. Bcuz I don't think they are, it's just a bluff. I still think they would rather do a sign and trade than just let Wallace walk away and get nothing.


----------



## nikebasketball (Jan 28, 2004)

The Blazers should try to acquire Shandon Anderson since he's unhappy in NY.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>nikebasketball</b>!
> The Blazers should try to acquire Shandon Anderson since he's unhappy in NY.



What do you think he could bring to the table that portland doesn't have?


----------



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>nikebasketball</b>!
> The Blazers should try to acquire Shandon Anderson since he's unhappy in NY.


Why would they want him? They already have better swing men than Anderson (with better contracts).


----------

