# Raptors pick on the table in a Rose-Penny swap...



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> "Don't get me wrong; it's not as if the Raptors are uncompromising. A Toronto source reveals the pick is on the table, but not without limits: "The unanswered question is how deep into the draft will it be protected from year to year."
> 
> -New York Post


Actually if true, it's a shocker.

-Petey


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> But two league sources said that Garden owner *James Dolan* wants Knicks brass to be more "fiscally responsible." Dolan does not want to add much more to his already league-high payroll for this non-playoff team unless the acquisitions are difference-makers.
> 
> Rose has an extra year left on his contract, so it would cost Dolan $34 million extra in salary and luxury tax. While Rose, 32, can still score, scouts say he's one of the league's worst defenders. One Knick decision-maker told The Post in November that it would be "crazy" to take Rose as is. A league official said the Knicks were still seeking more assets, including a first-round pick.


http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/59339.htm

If we can get that pick that would be great! Especially an unprotected 1st rounder, that would ease the pain of giving up our own unprotected pick to the Bulls.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Kitty said:


> http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/59339.htm
> 
> If we can get that pick that would be great! Especially an unprotected 1st rounder, that would ease the pain of giving up our own unprotected pick to the Bulls.


Remember Toronto is in rebuilding mode and it is unlikely they'd give up their top pick.

It would more likely be Denver's pick or our second rounder.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

shookem said:


> Remember Toronto is in rebuilding mode and it is unlikely they'd give up their top pick.
> 
> It would more likely be Denver's pick or our second rounder.


Hey I'm not going to be unhappy just as long as it's a 1st rounder. Regardless if it's Denver's pick or not. Like I said, we have no first rounders, so if we can get one that would be much appreciated. If it is in fact Denver's pick, then your Denver thread will more than likely be moved over here. :biggrin:


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Kitty said:


> Hey I'm not going to be unhappy just as long as it's a 1st rounder. Regardless if it's Denver's pick or not. Like I said, we have no first rounders, so if we can get one that would be much appreciated. If it is in fact Denver's pick, then your Denver thread will more than likely be moved over here. :biggrin:



yeah, it does seem likely if there is a trade that a pick would be involved. Everyone knows the Raps are really young and adding another three guys (plus the Roko and Uros in Europe) is not in the teams best interest.

A quater way through the season, was the Curry trade worth it? Would it be worth it without the pick? And is the pick the Chi has protected in any way? I know the Zeke wasn't high on this year's draft class and probably thought the Knicks would be better, but was this really a good move...?


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Although...*

that is Denver's pick, it came from NJ. With the year they are having, it could be a decent pick. Unprotected, the trade is a no-brainer for us. It has to be top 15 or better. As far as the Raps rebuilding, they have more pieces needed than just what that pick would be.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

*Re: Although...*



alphadog said:


> that is Denver's pick, it came from NJ. With the year they are having, it could be a decent pick. Unprotected, the trade is a no-brainer for us. It has to be top 15 or better. As far as the Raps rebuilding, they have more pieces needed than just what that pick would be.



True!

but the pick can't be completely unprotected, Denver has top 5 protection on it so that the most the Raps could offer.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

shookem said:


> yeah, it does seem likely if there is a trade that a pick would be involved. Everyone knows the Raps are really young and adding another three guys (plus the Roko and Uros in Europe) is not in the teams best interest.
> 
> A quater way through the season, was the Curry trade worth it? Would it be worth it without the pick? And is the pick the Chi has protected in any way? I know the Zeke wasn't high on this year's draft class and probably thought the Knicks would be better, but was this really a good move...?


I think the Curry trade was worth it, even though he isn't contributing like we expected right due to injury and his lack of defense and rebounding. The main thing is we have a young center, who with a little work will be able to improve. As for the draft pick we gave to the Bulls, it's unprotected which means they hope we fail miseribly which as of right now we are. I'm not too concerned about the Bulls getting our pick, because if the kid they draft becomes a stud he won't be in a Bulls uni for long anyway due to their history of letting great talent leave there building. We are also in rebuilding mode just like you guys, but the thing that I admire about your GM is he "correct me if I'm wrong" admits he is in rebuilding mode, unlike Zeke who tries to plaster the holes in this team and denies up until recently that we are in fact rebuilding, just so it dosen't make him look bad or have an impact on ticket sales.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: Although...*



shookem said:


> True!
> 
> but the pick can't be completely unprotected, Denver has top 5 protection on it so that the most the Raps could offer.


With Zeke's sucess at drafting folks, it can work out well for us either way. He has done well in the draft and I expect that to continue, I just wish that he had the same skills when it comes to making trades and signing free agents.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Kitty said:


> I think the Curry trade was worth it, even though he isn't contributing like we expected right due to injury and his lack of defense and rebounding. The main thing is we have a young center, who with a little work will be able to improve. As for the draft pick we gave to the Bulls, it's unprotected which means they hope we fail miseribly which as of right now we are. I'm not too concerned about the Bulls getting our pick, because if the kid they draft becomes a stud he won't be in a Bulls uni for long anyway due to their history of letting great talent leave there building. We are also in rebuilding mode just like you guys, but the thing that I admire about your GM is he "correct me if I'm wrong" admits he is in rebuilding mode, unlike Zeke who tries to plaster the holes in this team and denies up until recently that we are in fact rebuilding, just so it dosen't make him look bad or have an impact on ticket sales.



Oh yeah, Rob has no choice but to admit this is a rebuilding year, if he didn't he'd be crazy.

Plus, Zeke doens't strike me as a guy who likes to be in the hot seat. From our experience with him, he wanted everyone to like him, something that is impossible for a GM.

Rebuilding... ouch. I agree that the Curry trade wasn't the worst thing in the world, although I really like Mike Sweetney. The biggest mistake I think was the James signing.

Thank gawd we're in the atlantic, where everyone sucks!


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

*Re: Although...*



Kitty said:


> With Zeke's sucess at drafting folks, it can work out well for us either way. He has done well in the draft and I expect that to continue, I just wish that he had the same skills when it comes to making trades and signing free agents.



which is strange cause I've always figured him to be more of a sign and trade type of guy.

Did he draft Ariza? What about Sweetney?

Frye was a good pick, but totally a no-brainer, he was absolutly the BPA.

Gotta give him props for Nate though.


----------



## 85 lakers (Dec 22, 2005)

Unless Melo goes down, the Nuggets are making the playoffs. So that means you're not getting a lottery pick here. Probably something in the 15-20 range.

Is that worth a mediocre pick to endure one more year of salary cap hell? I don't think so.

I can't believe people want to see Marbury and Rose on the floor at the same time. That is a disaster waiting to happen. And this team needs DEFENSE, not offense. 

Between Curry, Frye, Marbury, Crawford, etc ... the offensive firepower is there. It's the defense that is lacking.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

85 lakers said:


> Unless Melo goes down, the Nuggets are making the playoffs. So that means you're not getting a lottery pick here. Probably something in the 15-20 range.


I dunno, I think it has more to do with what the Timberwolves do this season. If they win the division it might be really hard for the Nuggs to get in. As of today the are 9th in the West.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

85 lakers said:


> Unless Melo goes down, the Nuggets are making the playoffs. So that means you're not getting a lottery pick here. Probably something in the 15-20 range.
> 
> Is that worth a mediocre pick to endure one more year of salary cap hell? I don't think so.


If Zeke is making the selection regardless if it's the #1 or the 25th pick overall, he has a "history" of making good selections. 

When was the last time we were "under" the cap? You think management is concerned about that? We will be over the cap for years to come and adding one more year being over the cap won't make or break us because we are already broken.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

Petey said:


> Actually if true, it's a shocker.
> 
> -Petey


The title of this thread is misleading. The Denver pick is on the table. The Knicks are NOT getting a lottery pick in 2006 or 2007.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

lougehrig said:


> The title of this thread is misleading. The Denver pick is on the table. The Knicks are NOT getting a lottery pick in 2006 or 2007.


Do I detect some negativity in that post? Hmmm I wonder why? A pick is a pick, it does not matter if it's a lottery pick or not, and the way Denver is playing lately with their injuries I'll be glad to take that.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

what level of protection could the raps really need ?

i say let the raptors have the option of keeping the pick but have to give the knicks their pick the following year if they do ...either way , it will be a lotto pick , unless the nuggets/nets (whichever) make the playoffs this year ...in which case the raptors would logically pass the pick to the knicks, and if it wasn't a lotto pick they wouldn't have needed the protection.

rose would really help the knicks , he knows brown's system, is a good ballhandler and is a good starter level 3 in the league.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Kitty said:


> I think the Curry trade was worth it, even though he isn't contributing like we expected right due to injury and his lack of defense and rebounding. The main thing is we have a young center, who with a little work will be able to improve. As for the draft pick we gave to the Bulls, it's unprotected which means they hope we fail miseribly which as of right now we are. I'm not too concerned about the Bulls getting our pick, because if the kid they draft becomes a stud he won't be in a Bulls uni for long anyway due to their history of letting great talent leave there building. We are also in rebuilding mode just like you guys, but the thing that I admire about your GM is he "correct me if I'm wrong" admits he is in rebuilding mode, unlike Zeke who tries to plaster the holes in this team and denies up until recently that we are in fact rebuilding, just so it dosen't make him look bad or have an impact on ticket sales.


Kitty,not only did we give up the unprotected 2006 pick for Curry,we also gave Chicago the option to swap our 2007 pick for theirs if we suck...We wont be drafting for a while....


----------



## 85 lakers (Dec 22, 2005)

When was the last time a pick in the 15-20 range had a significant impact on a team? 

In addition ... this is pretty much the same Nuggets team that went on a tear at the end of 2004. Just because they're 9th now doesn't mean anything. Hell, the Lakers were 14th out west two weeks ago.

http://nbadraft.net/history.asp
2005 - None of them will even after 5.0 ppg this season.
2004 - Jefferson, Smith, and SMith have played well, but ALL on losing, non-playoff teams.
2003 - David West and Dhantay Jones ... West had played great this year, but for a cellar-dweller
2002 - Juan Dixon playing decent in limited action in Portland
2001 - Randolph has produced at 19, but taken the team where? Haywood has had a solid career

It's not about being 'over' or 'under' the cap: It's about being in position to pick up a free agent to help your team. If the Knicks swap for Jalen Rose, they can forget about looking at free agents for the next two years.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

who cares about the drafts history. zeke has not disapointed in the draft so far. He got ariza at 43, im sure he can find something at 16 or whatever


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

The True Essence said:


> who cares about the drafts history. zeke has not disapointed in the draft so far. He got ariza at 43, im sure he can find something at 16 or whatever


I agree, he has good draft history, so I couldn't care less if we get the 15-20th pick, I'm confident that he will make a solid selection.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*No credibility for 85 Laker...*

Go back and look at some of the players picked in that range (15 on up) since 2001. There is at least 20 that I would love to have on the Knicks instead of some of the players we have. The Lakers roster could use one or two, themselves. No takers for Gilbert Arenas? How 'bout Carlos Boozer, Dalembert,Collins.Tinsley, Parker, Okur, E watson, Prince, J Salmons, Flip Murray, Gadzuric, Korver, Bogans, J howard, T Outland, B Diaw, West, Nelson, JR and Josh Smith, A Jefferson, Whaley, Stoudamire, Simien, Warrick, Gerald Green, Granger, and J Graham? All these guys were taken 15 or later.....think that pick might be worth something? Everything in there from stars to good bench guys. Don't forget, some of these guys are very young. Hell, even 3 of our own came from that pool (Ariza, Lee, and Nate).


----------



## 85 lakers (Dec 22, 2005)

I'll just go ahead and guess that nobody has looked at the 2007 free agent class.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_13008.shtml

There are more than a dozen players who could help the Knicks far sooner than a middle-of-the-first-round draft pick.

This will be as strong a free agent class as I can remember. It's just one reason Raptors fans are salivating, as Toronto is supposed to be the team most under the cap heading into the summer of 07.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

85 lakers said:


> I'll just go ahead and guess that nobody has looked at the 2007 free agent class.
> 
> http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_13008.shtml
> 
> ...



I'll go ahead and guess that you're not aware that the Knicks are far too over the cap to sign any of those players.

Most of the young guys in that class will never even hit free agency, because they'll be signed to extensions next September/October. You have to be out of your mind if you think the Knicks will have a shot at LeBron, Wade, Melo, Bosh, etc.

Furthermore, that drafted rookie will be a lot cheaper than whatever veteran the Knicks are able to acquire. Take a basketball economics course please.

Yes, we're all just DYING to overpay for Antawn Jamison and Morris Peterson. Clearly this is the way to win a championship.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

85 lakers said:


> When was the last time a pick in the 15-20 range had a significant impact on a team?
> 
> In addition ... this is pretty much the same Nuggets team that went on a tear at the end of 2004. Just because they're 9th now doesn't mean anything. Hell, the Lakers were 14th out west two weeks ago.
> 
> ...


So like, you DO realize that Rose is a free agent in 2007, right? How does getting Rose keep the Knicks from looking at free agents? The only way they can sign players is with the mid-level exception, regardless of whether they get Rose or not.

How convenient it is that you only looked at picks 15-20, and not anything after 20. You talk like the talent isn't there, when in reality the scouting systems of teams picking there have blundered drafts by taking Kirk Haston and the like ahead of players such as Gilbert Arenas, Tony Parker, Mehmet Okur, Bobby Simmons, Earl Watson, Zach Randolph, Jason Collins, Brendan Haywood, Gerald Wallace, Samuel Dalembert, Jamaal Tinsley, Trenton Hassell, and Jarron Collins (in other words, a lot of players who are starting in the NBA right now).

Let's analyze that 15-20 again.

2001: Steven Hunter, Kirk Haston, Michael Bradley, Jason Collins, Zach Randolph, Brendan Haywood

Let's see, THREE quality backup centers (who have mostly started), and a 20/10 power forward. Bradley's career has been injury riddled, and Haston is out of the league.

Who needs to draft players? We can just fill our void at center via free agency. Oh wait, we already did that when we gave Jerome James 5 years and 30 million.

2002: Bostjan Nachbar, Jiri Welsch, Juan Dixon, Curtis Borchardt, Ryan Humphrey, Kareem Rush

Nachbar, Welsch, and Rush have all had some moments starting. Dixon is having his career year. Borchardt has been injury riddled, and Humphrey is out of the league. But let's ignore that Tayshaun Prince was taken 23rd, and Nenad Krstic 24th. Or that Dan Gadzuric and Carlos Boozer were taken early in round two.

2003: Reece Gaines, Troy Bell, Zarko Cabarkapa, David West, Aleksandar Pavlovic, Dahntay Jones

Let's see, two really dumb picks, two young projects, a 16/7 PF, and a player in the deep Memphis rotation. But likewise, we should ignore that Boris Diaw, Brian Cook, Leandro Barbosa, and Josh Howard were drafted in picks 21-29.

2004: Al Jefferson, Kirk Snyder, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Dorrel Wright, Jameer Nelson

It's funny that you knock the 2004 15-20 for being on losing teams. How many rookies get playing time on good teams? Perhaps you should knock the players who sign with bad teams in free agency. You know, like Michael Doleac, Dikembe Mutombo, Jamal Crawford, Jerome James, etc. 

I bet you're really high on guys like Mehmet Okur, Carlos Boozer, Joe Johnson, Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Kenyon Martin, Juwan Howard, etc. You know, impact players who have made HUGE impacts on their teams win-loss records. So huge, that they're all under .500.

Also, the fact that FOUR of these six players were drafted right out of high school seems to be completely lost on you.

2005: Antoine Wright, Joey Graham, Danny Granger, Gerald Green, Hakim Warrick, Julius Hodge

Very smooth, talking about players who have barely played in a season that isn't even 30 games old yet. I'll take Danny Granger over any player the Knicks will have a shot at getting in free agency, thanks, and that's before i even talk about the pricetag. Players 21-25 are all in the rotations of their respective teams. I guess if we based picks 10-12 on this years draft (Andrew Bynum, Fran Vazquez, Yaruslav Korolev) it's even worse to have a late lottery pick than it is to have a middle round pick.

More interesting is that you only talk about recent history.
2000: Hedo Turkoglu, Desmond Mason, Quentin Richardson, Jamaal Magloire, Speedy Claxton
1999: Ron Artest, James Posey (Kirilenko taken 24th)
1998: Matt Harpring, Pat Garrity, Rasho Nesterovic (Ricky Davis taken 21st, Al Harrington 25th, Rashard Lewis and Cuttino Mobley taken in round two.)
1996: Steve Nash, Jermaine O'Neal, Zydrunas Ilgauskas
1995: Brent Barry, Bob Sura, Theo Ratliff (Finley taken 21st)


----------

