# Watson for James or Rose?



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> "Earl Watson could solve the Knicks' point guard problems. He is on the Nuggets' depth chart behind Andre Miller and Earl Boykins, and Denver is looking for a forward with Nene sidelined. The Knicks could move either Malik Rose or Jerome James for Watson, who scored four points in just over 17 minutes of action."
> 
> -New York Daily News


Don't even think the numbers are close though.

-Petey


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Petey said:


> Don't even think the numbers are close though.
> 
> -Petey


actually they are, 5 mil. for each watson and james , 6 mil. for rose. both fit under trade rules easily $wise.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

Wow, I'm shocked that Watson is making that much.

-Petey


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

:laugh: if ny thinks they could trade rose or james...we dont want your crap.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> :laugh: if ny thinks they could trade rose or james...we dont want your crap.


And you actually think you have a PF or Center at this point that can relieve Camby? You not going to get far with a injury riddle K-Mart and a out for the season Nene.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Kitty said:


> And you actually think you have a PF or Center at this point that can relieve Camby? You not going to get far with a injury riddle K-Mart and a out for the season Nene.


I wouldnt give up james for earl Watson so fast...Ild rather go find Frank Williams or see how Jay Williams is healing


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> I wouldnt give up james for earl Watson so fast...Ild rather go find Frank Williams or see how Jay Williams is healing


Why? Are you scared to death of PGs who can play defense, can actually run an offense, and don't think shoot first? This comment certainly makes it seem that way.

Or would you be upset because Watson would make Nate Robinson the offical 12th man since he'd actually put up a good A/T ratio to go with the poor shooting percentage?


----------



## kidd2108 (Nov 20, 2005)

James for watson is a no brainer. The james signing was the worst move under the isiah era. If the knicks can do it, they should. Theres no point in having james sit out for 5 years and having no value. Same thing for denver, no need for watson to be sitting out.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

I for one would like to see James collapse while running up and down the court at Denver altitude.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Watson is not a pure point....*

Anyone that thinks he is is deluding themselves....LB has said as much. He is more of a scoring guard pg and we have one already. Marbury will make a crappy 2 guard besides.....he has no idea of game flow and will always be prone take badly timed shots when control is what is needed..no judgement.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Watson is not a pure point....*



alphadog said:


> Anyone that thinks he is is deluding themselves....LB has said as much. He is more of a scoring guard pg and we have one already. Marbury will make a crappy 2 guard besides.....he has no idea of game flow and will always be prone take badly timed shots when control is what is needed..no judgement.


thank you Alfa...a little sanity is always welcomed....


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Rashidi said:


> I for one would like to see James collapse while running up and down the court at Denver altitude.


I think a simple trade would be a kinder wish


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Article in the Post...*

said we are looking for a PG but don't have the resources to trade. Also said that Curry is the ONLY untouchable. I hate the sound of that...Lee and Frye are future stars, in their own way, although for Lee it may be as a role player. Anyone else I am OK with although I like Nate and think he may turn out to be a good one, even if he is another bench player. Too much heart and hustle to trade. If we have to take our lumps this year, so be it. I'll wait for the season end and another good draft/trade.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Article in the Post...*



alphadog said:


> said we are looking for a PG but don't have the resources to trade. Also said that Curry is the ONLY untouchable. I hate the sound of that...Lee and Frye are future stars, in their own way, although for Lee it may be as a role player. Anyone else I am OK with although I like Nate and think he may turn out to be a good one, even if he is another bench player. Too much heart and hustle to trade. If we have to take our lumps this year, so be it. I'll wait for the season end and another good draft/trade.


If Frye isnt untouchable or dam close(KG trade),then Zeke or Brown should have their collective heads examined..The guy is far better than I ever imagined,and I was high on him from the start.Other than Sheed,Dirk or TD,I cant think of many 6'11 players with his stroke...And the soft label is ridiculous


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

You never heard of Vladimir Radmanovic or Pat Garrity? They have 3pt range and are just as mediocre on the boards.

I certainly hope you haven't forgotten Chris Webber, Kevin Garnett, Amare Stoudemire, Rashard Lewis, Pau Gasol, etc.

Frye's mid-range game is hardly any better than Marcus Camby's, and certainly isn't better than Antonio McDyess' or Kurt Thomas'. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

Where does the soft label come from?

He's not Oakley. He's not Mason. He's not Horace Grant. He's not Kurt Thomas. He's not Udonis Haslem. He's certainly not hard, that's for sure.



> Anyone that thinks he is is deluding themselves....LB has said as much. He is more of a scoring guard pg and we have one already.


Are you talking about Watson? He's averaged 5.7 ppg for his career. He's averaged 3.6 apg to go with 1.5 tpg, which is a very good ratio.



> Marbury will make a crappy 2 guard besides.....he has no idea of game flow and will always be prone take badly timed shots when control is what is needed..no judgement.


Because you know, Kobe, Tmac, and Iverson NEVER take ill-advised shots. Never ever.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Rashidi said:


> Frye's mid-range game is hardly any better than Marcus Camby's, and certainly isn't better than Antonio McDyess' or Kurt Thomas'. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here.


From what I seen so far his mid-range game is way better than Marcus, and is just as good as KT and Diceman




Rashidi said:


> Where does the soft label come from?
> 
> He's not Oakley. He's not Mason. He's not Horace Grant. He's not Kurt Thomas. He's not Udonis Haslem. He's certainly not hard, that's for sure.


Guys like Oak, Mason and Grant are extinct. PF's like that are hard to come by. He isn't soft and he isn't Oakley but he isn't afraid to get in there and defend and rebound.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Rashidi said:


> You never heard of Vladimir Radmanovic or Pat Garrity? They have 3pt range and are just as mediocre on the boards.
> 
> I certainly hope you haven't forgotten Chris Webber, Kevin Garnett, Amare Stoudemire, Rashard Lewis, Pau Gasol, etc.
> 
> ...


I heard of every one of those guys...Read the quote..I said players who are 6'11"...And you must be joking with Amare,Dice and Camby....


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Truth....*

...Don't bite, Rashidi is trolling again. He makes some of the dumbest statements...the only purpose HAS to be to engage and enrage. Nobody can be THAT stupid.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

*Re: Truth....*

Rashidi is the epitome of trolling on this board. But I agree with him on ONE issue. That is that Watson would actually help this team.


----------

