Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

2009 Game Thread: Knicks vs Celtics

Space. Pace. Win?

Bring the pain.

134 comments on “2009 Game Thread: Knicks vs Celtics

  1. Thomas B.

    Damn you beat me to the game thread post. Oh well no sense in letting my jeaneus go to waste. :-)

    For the three people that are not watching playoff football….

    The New York Knicks take on the Boston Celtics for the third time this season (0-2 in last two meetings).

    New York Knicks-Offense 98.5 105.5 49.7 15.9 23.6 20.7
    Rank 1 20 12 20 28 28
    Boston Celtics-Defense 91.5 98.4 45.5 17.4 24.1 25.6
    Rank 16 1 1 5 2 23
    New York Knicks-Defense 98.5 109.1 51.9 15 27 19.7
    Rank 1 22 28 23 16 4
    Boston Celtics-Offense 91.5 110 52.5 17.8 28.2 28.6
    Rank 16 5 2 30 7 2

    While the Celtics have been slightly off the pace in the last five games (2-3), they still have the best record in the conference (29-5). If the Knicks want to have a chance in this game, the team has to try to get the Celtic starting five into foul trouble. The Celtics have one of the thinnest reserve groups in the conference. As bad as the Celtics’ bench is it still trumps the Knicks’ bench because the Knicks don’t have one. D’antoni has been playing a seven man rotation for some time now. Things will be even harder on the Knicks if Thomas is out again with the toe injury.

    What to watch for: Knicks’ interior defense. In the last meeting the Celtics had an easy time in the paint. The Celtics just used good ball movement until they could get a high percentage shot inside.

    What to watch for 2: Kendrick Perkins. Kevin Garnett may be the face of the Celtics’ defense but it has been KP not KG that has been the defensive force for the Celtics against the Knicks. In the last meeting Perkins blocked 4 of the Celtics’ 6 shots. He also pulled down 12 rebounds. Perkins has the highest foul rate of any Celtics starter at 3.5 per 36 minutes. The Knicks need to take it to Perkins and get him on the bench.

    What to watch for 3: Rajon Rondo. I think Rondo is more valuable to the Celtic than Paul Pierce. Rondo is much more efficient (53.4 eFG% vs. 47.4), has a much better ast-r (38.0 vs. 16.9 with 40 being the best), a higher PER (20.4 vs. 16.7) and is just as strong a rebounder at the PG position as Pierce is at the forward (9.6 vs. 9.3). The Knicks “defensive strategy” has to focus on disrupting Rondo and forcing the ball into the hands of more turnover prone players.

  2. Gorky

    Breaking news: Mardy Collins just had a 12 assist game against Detroit. Of course he shot 1-7 and it played all of 42 minutes, but stll fairly shocking.

  3. Thomas B.

    What’s going on here?

    The Knicks managed to get KG to pick up two quick fouls, that helped.

  4. d-mar

    I like D’Antoni’s move of putting Jeffries on Rondo; it seems to have taken him a little out of his game. Knicks D overall pretty good, making really dumb turnovers on offense, which they can’t afford as big underdogs.

  5. Gorky

    The fact that this game is this close is amazing.

    It’s a shame Q-Rich is playing so poorly, he really hates the Celtics.

  6. ess-dog

    Jeffries is pretty active out there on defense and on the glass. It’s too bad he and Harrington can’t be fused into one legitimate player.

  7. d-mar

    The fact that this game is this close is amazing.
    It’s a shame Q-Rich is playing so poorly, he really hates the Celtics.

    I don’t think you can have a worse first half than Q just had. And all his missed shots were total bricks.

  8. jon abbey

    tons of upsets in the NBA today, looks like everyone would rather be watching football than be on the court.

  9. jon abbey

    tons of upsets in the NBA today, looks like everyone would rather be watching football than be playing themselves.

  10. italian stallion

    I just turned the game on. Is QRich really 1-12? OMG. that’s unbelievable. Between Chandler and QRich, we can’t get any consistent shooting. We really need for The Rooster to return so we can reduce QRich’s role and just have deal with Chandler’s growing pains !

  11. italian stallion

    Chandler has absolutely no conscience.

    I don’t think it’s his concience. I think it’s his basketball IQ. He doesn’t quite understand that the idea is to get the best possible shot and not just take any reasonable shot. Even worse, he’s not especially good at telling the difference between a bad shot and a reasonable shot yet.

  12. italian stallion

    Then he does something like that move on Garnett and you know he has the talent to be a much better player than he is now if/when he figures it all out.

  13. ess-dog
    Chandler has absolutely no conscience.

    I don’t think it’s his concience. I think it’s his basketball IQ. He doesn’t quite understand that the idea is to get the best possible shot and not just take any reasonable shot. Even worse, he’s not especially good at telling the difference between a bad shot and a reasonable shot yet.

    To be fair, Chandler’s shot selection isn’t as ridiculous as Crawford’s was. Even though Chandler shoots too early in the posession, his shots are relatively open shots. Crawford was much worse at a more advanced age.

  14. italian stallion

    The one small positive thing I’ve noticed about Chandler lately has been despite the poor outside shooting, he’s getting to the free throw line a lot more and he’s a much better free throw shooter so far this year. So he is learning.

  15. jon abbey

    I thought you guys were being too rough on Chandler, but that 1 on 3 fling he just took with 10 minutes left was like Z-Bo at his worst.

  16. italian stallion

    I thought you guys were being too rough on Chandler, but that 1 on 3 fling he just took with 10 minutes left was like Z-Bo at his worst.

    I was actually laughing at that one. ;-) At least the defense is keeping us ahead while we are in a coma on offense.

  17. DRed

    Speaking of Gallinari, any update on when he’ll be playing?

    I can’t believe we’re in this game while shooting so badly.

  18. Gorky

    I don’t think Danilo was that good at shooting in the one game he played in. Hopefully that was his back, and he’ll be better later.

    Q-Rich has had some good games, he’s just inconsistent. I don’t think a rookie is likely to be more consistent.

  19. italian stallion

    Yea. Gallinari is likely to look mediocre at best for awhile, but I can tolerate mediocre from a kid. QRich drives me crazy sometimes. In the mean time, Pierce is starting to take over.

  20. Thomas B.

    Ow, Pierce just flew into Jeffries’ crotch. Not pleasant for either.

    Still better than the face plant Cassell did into Penny Marshall. We were mere seconds away from the conception of the world’s ugliest baby.

  21. Gorky

    The Knicks “defensive strategy” has to focus on disrupting Rondo and forcing the ball into the hands of more turnover prone players.

    Good call Thomas B.

  22. Thomas B.

    The Knicks “defensive strategy” has to focus on disrupting Rondo and forcing the ball into the hands of more turnover prone players.

    Good call Thomas B.

    Blind man plays darts long enough even he hits a bullseye.

    But thanks

  23. jon abbey

    they have to win every once in a while, so pretty nice that it comes against Boston and with a career high by my man Chandler, maybe he’ll get a couple of weeks of slack here now. hopefully they’ll get back to losing next game, though.

  24. Thomas B.

    Blind man plays darts long enough even he hits a bullseye.

    Knicks 3pt shooting?

    LOL! Amen to that.

  25. Caleb

    The one small positive thing I’ve noticed about Chandler lately has been despite the poor outside shooting, he’s getting to the free throw line a lot more

    Definitely – last few games he’s obviously had a different approach. Not a small thing either..

  26. italian stallion

    Good call Thomas. I know Boston has been struggling a little lately, but I gave them very little chance of winning this one. You hit on the correct strategy….and even better, the Knicks executed and played good defense. That’s the problem with D’Antoni, he’s always thinking about defense. LMAO. Have a nice night everyone. That was fun.

  27. jon abbey

    “I’m blaming all future Knicks losses on Jon “The boo generator 2.0? Abbey”

    heh, I get mistaken for Clyde on the street all the time too.

    just remember my philosophy when we miss the playoffs and are picking 10th on draft day.

  28. d-mar

    As much as I loved the Knicks defensive intensity (which for once lasted the whole game) we should be thankful that Ray Allen (actually both Allens) couldn’t hit anything in the 2nd half. If he hits his usual number of 3′s, we probably lose that one in the last minute on a parade of Pierce free throws.

  29. 2010

    i love having harrington come off the bench and ive been thrilled with him as a knick. he brings so much intensity and he just seems proud to put on the knicks uniform and play in the garden. he seems so excited to be here. i think robinson also is a great spark off the bench and brings so much energy when he comes in.

    Chandler has also started to impress me with some of his moves lately- that was a great move when he went down the baseline from the corner on kg and then used the rim to protect his layup. i think he will become a more consistent player when he starts taking less perimeter shots and works on a mid-range/driving game.

    great game and great effort tonight.

    all that being said, i still want ping pong balls.

  30. DRed

    In all seriousness, Jon, is there someone in particular you’re hoping we get in the lottery? I don’t really follow college or HS hoops at all.

  31. Duff Soviet Union

    In all seriousness, Jon, is there someone in particular you’re hoping we get in the lottery? I don’t really follow college or HS hoops at all.

    I’m not a Knicks fan, but James Harden (soph shooting guard from Arizona State) would look damn good in a Knicks jersey if he’s available.

  32. jon abbey

    wait, you’re not a Knicks fan? haven’t you posted here a ton?

    I’m probably rooting for Thabeet or Curry at this point, Thabeet because guys with his skill set are quite rare, Curry because he can shoot like crazy and he’s already buddies with LeBron. my fear is more that the 2009 draft will end up just like the 2008 one, in which we’ll be picking just after all the top guys go, and since we have no 2010 pick, we need to make this one count.

    if I actually thought there was any chance we could make the playoffs, I might feel differently, but I honestly don’t understand how the team as presently constituted beats anyone.

  33. jon abbey

    Chad Ford on Tuesday:

    ========================================================

    Ben: (Los Angeles, CA): I have heard a lot of rumors that Ricky Rubio will not declare for the 2009 nba draft. Are the rumors true and if so why do you have Rubio on your mock draft?

    SportsNation Chad Ford: He has a large buyout which complicates things. But if he continues to bounce back from injury (he’s had two consecutive good games in the Spanish league) he’s a likely Top 3 pick in the draft. I don’t think he’ll pass that by. From what I can gather from my sources, agents will find a way to get him here.

    ========================================================

    he’d obviously be another ideal target, as I’ve been saying for a while.

  34. Thomas B.

    I understand what jon is rooting for – in theory. The problem is that the draft is such a crap shoot. You could have the worst record and end up with the 4th pick. or you could have the 9th worst record and end up picking 1st. But even if we all out tank, we may not catch the top, er bottom 4-5 in the NBA. The bottom 5 in the West look hopeless. OKC might not win 12 games this year. The Wizards had a nice win today but they only barely won and they are not getting any better.

    The 2009 draft will likely yield a similar player between 6-13. Let assume that the top tier guys are Thabeet, Curry, Rubio, Griffin, hill, Clark, and Jennings. The middle of the pack picks (so far) mostly look like projects and those picks dont give you much at the positions we need, unless we are looking for a 2 this year.

    I’d love Thabeet and Curry but I have a feeling that we couldnt get either even if we won .333 of the reamining games. We still likely pick 6-8 and we would have to get a “project.” When we are only 2 games out of a playoff spot, I’d rather take a shot at the playoffs rather than mail it in jut to get the 7th pick in a 6 deep draft.

    Playoffs or a lock. You know, we could still trade Lee for an unprotected pick from one of the other tankers if you want to increase your odds that much. Hey, look it was a hypothetical trade Lee fans. Please stop throwing things at me.

  35. Z

    “I’d love Thabeet and Curry but I have a feeling that we couldnt get either even if we won .333 of the reamining games. We still likely pick 6-8 and we would have to get a “project.” When we are only 2 games out of a playoff spot, I’d rather take a shot at the playoffs rather than mail it in jut to get the 7th pick in a 6 deep draft.”

    Yeah, but it’s easier to trade up from 6 than to trade up from 14. Just look at the Grizzlies. They had the 5th pick and essentially traded up to the 3rd this year.

    Tanking, as jon says, would give us a greater asset than a 1st round playoff sweep would. Whether that asset is used well, either in the draft or in a trade, that is up to Walsh. Do we trust him enough to subject ourselves to losing? I think so.

  36. oberonz

    OKC is the test…and they are much improved, play hard and would love to beat a marquee big market team who just beat the champs…if the Knicks are for real they beat OKC..if not you are looking at a 4 game losing streat head on.

  37. Caleb

    If it makes you feel any better, I don’t think Thabeet or Curry is a top-tier prospect, if by that you mean top-5 or maybe even top-10.

  38. Caleb

    To tank or not to tank?

    I would be a lot more excited to see us picking Ricky Rubio, than to see us getting pancaked by LeBron in Round 1.

    I would be just as mad as Jon Abbey if we made Laydenesque maneuvers, sacrificing cap space just to try and bump up a few games in the standings. I’ll be pissed if we trade young “potential” for a vet who gives us a better shot at the 2008-2009 playoffs.

    But I still root to win.

    I can’t bring myself to root for my team to lose.
    If the team starts sucking even more, it means the players we have some hope in, aren’t as good as we thought.
    Trying to lose is a bad habit for the players.

    Besides which…
    It’s a lottery. Lottery. The difference in odds between 4th-worst record, say, and 8th worst, aren’t that big. Especially when you factor in the uncertainties of which player will pan out.

  39. 2010

    theres no telling how many games we could loose if we trade lee for a prospect or draft picks and dont have anyone to rebound. at that point, only the thunder are out of reach. its a really tough position for walsh- how can he basically admit he is giving up on this year and next year. i root for them to loose this year, get a high pick and then come together next year.

    after the crawford randolph trades the knicks went from 6-5 to 7-14. without the knicks making a trade to improve the team this year, i dont see how they make the playoffs. i think they started to tank when that happened whether or not they believed they would still be able to compete.

    they should shut the rooster down for the year and trade their assets and go into full tank mode.


    i took a look at the blazers blog to see their thoughts on lee- they have a mixed reaction. if the knicks do that trade, it better be for bayless who is signed for under 3 mil in ’10 and not sergio who is a restricted free agent that year.

  40. ess-dog
    In all seriousness, Jon, is there someone in particular you’re hoping we get in the lottery? I don’t really follow college or HS hoops at all.

    I’m not a Knicks fan, but James Harden (soph shooting guard from Arizona State) would look damn good in a Knicks jersey if he’s available.

    That’s exactly who I was thinking of. He’ll probably go top 5 though. SG has to be the biggest need at this point (Q and Nate looked awful tonight.)

  41. Caleb

    they should shut the rooster down for the year and trade their assets and go into full tank mode.

    Trading Lee as a salary dump (or for Bayless) is ludicrous.

    Why in the world would LeBron, or any marquee free agent, sign with a team that has a 20-62 record, a few draft picks and zero real players?

    If the Blazers gave up, say, Przybilla AND a couple of late-round picks (or even Bayless, maybe – I’m just not sold on him) — then you might consider it. Or, a trade that got you a lottery pick AND no post-2010 contract… those are things you might consider. But gutting the team just for salary room and high picks, that is a serious losing strategy.

    p.s. If Gallinari is healthy, playing him is probably a win-win proposition — he’ll be terrible this year (especially coming off an injury), making the team worse in the short-term as he takes minutes from Harrington or Lee, or even Chandler. At the same time, we give our lottery pick some experience, and get to find out what we might have, long-term.

  42. Caleb

    I like James Harden, too…

    re: other Lee ideas — someone mentioned a Denver trade that would send us, in effect, Charlotte’s pick next year — I will confidently predict that that will be a good pick. So I’d think about that one. Denver also has an extra pick to throw in, and might even be willing to throw in Balkman, if they’re getting back Lee to play those minutes. Value-wise that would be pretty good, but unfortunately I get the feeling that D’Antoni wasn’t sold on RB. Another Denver idea — Lee & Robinson for JR Smith & a 1st-rounder. Lee for Smith is a pretty even trade, and saves us money. I love Nate, but value-wise, a mid- 1st is probably right, and would save us even more money.

    I’d also keeo in mind that this year’s draft is supposed to be memorably weak — although sometimes those projections don’t pan out, especially looking at it this far out.

  43. 2010

    “Trading Lee as a salary dump (or for Bayless) is ludicrous.”

    Sorry, I didnt make myself clear. I would not trade him in a salary dump, or just for bayless. id trade him for something like bayless and 2 first round picks. (i was impressed with bayless and think he could be good). i dont know how much more we would be able to get for him. i think if we keep him it will kill our cap space so i believe the better move is to trade him between now and the deadline. id rather have the *chance* to sign 2 max contracts than have lee be overpaid and only be able to sign one max player.

    your idea of Przybilla and picks seems similar to what i am suggesting (good young player and multiple first round picks)but pryzbilla has a player option in ’10 and id rather roll the dice with bayless.

    i think the knicks are a more attractive destination if they have room for to max contracts (i know its dreaming but…) maybe lebron and bosh decide they want to play together in the garden for dantoni.

    i think that this season’s record wont matter as much as next season in terms of signing guys. no one is going to want to come to a team thats 20-62 but if they are 20-62 this year and .500 next year and competitive thats a different story. Especially if they have talent in galinari, chadler, and bayless, and a high pick from this years draft (the knicks) and a low first rounder from Portland, and there is still room for two max contracts.

    the reason id shut down the rooster is to make sure his back is healthy and he is not rushing back to help the knicks get swept in the first round. it would be nice to get him a little playing time so he can develop (since he got no training camp) and see what weve got. That thought was not to help them tank, just to protect his health long term.

  44. 2010

    this trade seems ludicrous to me…

    from the new york daily news:
    “There was a report of the Knicks being involved in a deal that would send Quentin Richardson to the Clippers and Lee to Portland, with the Knicks getting back Camby and former Knicks first-round pick Channing Frye.”

    lee has to be worth more than that and it makes no sense to move him for players that wont help you in 2010. plus it doesnt help remove salary.

  45. d-mar

    This from today’s Daily News: “The Knicks’ first field goal came with 6:46 remaining after Brian Scalabrine blocked Harrington’s drive to the basket, screamed “get that (stuff) out of here” and Boston stood and watched Lee scoop up the loose ball for a dunk.”

    I thought House was the only trash talking scrub on the C’s, it’s obviously contagious.

  46. Caleb

    Sorry, I didnt make myself clear. I would not trade him in a salary dump, or just for bayless. id trade him for something like bayless and 2 first round picks.

    Gotcha – I understand where you’re coming from now.

    id rather have the *chance* to sign 2 max contracts than have lee be overpaid and only be able to sign one max player.

    In a league with Zach Randolph and Raef LaFrentz and Eddy Curry and etc., it’s hard to imagine Lee being overpaid. Even at $10 million he’s a bargain, and easily tradeable if it comes down to it.

    True, signing him to an extension kills the chance of signing a 2nd max free agent in 2010 (unless we can unload Curry). But I say – so what? Sign a big free agent in 2010, and another in 2011 when Curry and Jeffries come off the books. Or trade those expirings for a 2nd star. Lee is a borderline All-Star, starting PF for the next 7 or 8 years – the idea isn’t to trade him for a chance at an upgrade, it’s to add multiple stars to a team that has him on it.

    You might get equivalent value with a top-6 pick, or by combining a lottery pick with an extra pick(s) and/or cap space. But it would take a massive dose of luck to replace Lee’s value with picks in the 20s.

    the reason id shut down the rooster is to make sure his back is healthy and he is not rushing back to help the knicks get swept in the first round.

    I’m fine with shutting him down.No reason to risk his health. But if he does come back, I think he will hurt and not help, short-term. No knock on Gallinari – that’s just par for the course with a 20-year-old rook.

    if they are 20-62 this year and .500 next year and competitive thats a different story. Especially if they have talent in galinari, chadler, and bayless, and a high pick from this years draft (the knicks) and a low first rounder from Portland, and there is still room for two max contracts.

    I doubt that Chandler, Gallinari or this year’s #6 pick is ever as good as Lee — and they definitely won’t be in the short-term. Bayless is a 4th stringer — what’s the ceiling for 2009-2010? You don’t turn things around even with a good pick. Look at the Bulls with Rose, or the Grizz with Mayo. Even if Lee brings back equivalent long-term value (lottery picks, multiple picks, etc.) it will make us worse in the short-run. I don’t see LeBron or another established star, signing on with a team of 21-year-olds — even good ones.

    Now, I WOULD be willing to “tank” by trading solid players I don’t expect to be here after 2010 (Harrington, Duhon, Q) – if it gets us extra draft picks or prospects.

  47. Frank

    Quick salary cap question:

    We have a bunch of guys that come off the cap after 2010. Is it possible to sign, say, LeBron and Bosh, that will fill up the cap, then come back and resign Harrington and whoever above the cap using Bird rights? My feeling is that that would not work under the rules, but I am struggling to find anything about that.

    Regarding trading Lee — if the trade would bring Camby back AND we could somehow resign Camby to play with our 2 MAX free agents, I think you’d have to do it. A team with something like Duhon, Nate, Chandler, Gallinari, Lebron, Bosh/Stoudemire, and Camby would be very difficult to beat, and IMO a title contender right off the bat and probably for several years (until Camby breaks down completely). As much as I like David Lee, Camby is one of the top defensive players in the game, a great passer, and a great finisher. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen him do the pick-and-roll like Lee, but neither have I ever seen Lee block 4.5 shots per 40. And Camby’s a better rebounder than Lee, at least on the defensive end. AND– he’s a great guy and fan favorite at MSG, which would dull the pain at Lee’s loss for me, at least.

    On top of that, I’m not sure where Lee fits in on a team that has Camby and Bosh/Stoudemire. Those two will take up the lion’s share of the PF/C minutes, and if Gallinari pans out or they resign someone like Harrington, then how many minutes will be left for Lee?

  48. TDM

    this trade seems ludicrous to me…
    from the new york daily news:“There was a report of the Knicks being involved in a deal that would send Quentin Richardson to the Clippers and Lee to Portland, with the Knicks getting back Camby and former Knicks first-round pick Channing Frye.”
    lee has to be worth more than that and it makes no sense to move him for players that wont help you in 2010. plus it doesnt help remove salary.

    I don’t buy this rumor. The Knicks and Clippers have to be getting more than proposed, and Portland is getting a boondoggle by only giving up Frye for Lee. The Clips are giving up Camby for Q with no other incentive – they both have 2 years remaining and salaries in the same ballpark. Also, why would the Knicks get Frye instead of one of Portland’s pgs. Even if draft picks are included, I don’t think Portland has enough of them to give to the Clips and Knicks to make this deal palatable all the way around.

  49. Owen

    Caleb – As is usually the case I think you are 100% right. You still get my vote for Knicks GM.

    The idea of trading Lee has been mooted 100′s of times on this board. To me it still doesnt look a good idea. It’s very unlikely you will get a better player than him in the draft and there is little reason to believe he will be untradeable if we sign him to a contract. He remains exactly the kind of value for money player you can build a great team around.

    If the right deal came around, sure, but Kleiza, draft picks, or cap space is not what the doctor ordered.

    Thoughts on last nights game:

    On a day where we hit our threes and our opponents miss them, we can beat anyone. Al “the human craps table” Harrington was rolling really well last night. He had three makes that just shouldn’t have happened.

    Wilson Chandler had a superb game in pretty much ever facet. He had a ton of tough rebounds in traffic. But it’s hard to understate how important going 11-12 from the ft line is. That jacked his ts% for the game from around 50% to 64%. That has to be the blueprint, using his athleticism to get to the line 6 times per game at least. If he can do that, it becomes a lot easier to see him becoming a quality NBA starter.

    Jared Jeffries wasn’t credited for a steal but I thought he created three of them. It has been noted in the papers, but he played great defense.

    It really amazes me that Leon Powe can only get 12 minutes for the Celtics. Clearly, the stat wizards on their staff are seeing something I am not. To me he could start for a lot of teams in the NBA at power forward. Actually, that’s too strong. Still, he definitely seems to be one of those quality bench guys that may emerge as a quality starter some day, sort of like a Landry, Varejao, or Millsap.

  50. mase

    “In a league with Zach Randolph and Raef LaFrentz and Eddy Curry and etc., it’s hard to imagine Lee being overpaid. Even at $10 million he’s a bargain, and easily tradeable if it comes down to it. ”

    its that type of thinking that has had us stuck in salary cap hell. No one is untradable on this roster and that includes Lee.

  51. Ben R

    I also agree with you Caleb. I think keeping Lee should be the teams #1 priority because that is something we have to deal with this summer not next. We need to get him straightened away and then start looking at 2010. I feel all the LeBron talk is way premature and reminds me a bit of Isiah’s “collecting assets to make a move for Garnett” gambit – A way the team can give a glimmer of hope to the fans, no matter how misleading or false that hope may be, so they have carte blanch when it omes to managing the team.

    Also for me any trade talk with the Blazers should begin with Fernandez, not a combo guard in Bayless or a really inefficient pg in Sergio. If I had to trade Lee to the Blazers I would want Fernendez plus one more asset to be the starting point.

    Owen – as for Powe I do not understand it either. Not only do the stats back up him playing more watching him play he always seems much better than Davis, or Scalibrine. I do not understand how he is not gettign at least 20-25 minutes everygame off the bench.

  52. Caleb

    its that type of thinking that has had us stuck in salary cap hell. No one is untradable on this roster and that includes Lee

    I agree – no one should be untouchable. But none of the ideas that have been thrown out lately, come close to offering the same value.

    The reason we can’t trade Curry or Jeffries without a sweetener, or at all, isn’t because they make a lot of money, per se – it’s because they aren’t close to being worth it. Every team in the league would rather have $11 million to play with, than Eddy Curry.

    On the other hand, many teams would rather have David Lee than $10 million in cap space. Ergo, you can easily trade him — for another player of similar value (like JR Smith), for a shorter contract (like next year, if we change our mind and want the extra cap space), or for a high draft pick.

    The reason: if you have $10 million to spend on the free agent market – it’s still not easy to get a player as good as David Lee. In 2010, there will probably only be 3 or 4 guys actually available. From the Knicks perspective, you don’t dump your best player, because you MIGHT sign one of those guys.

    re: Powe – I assume the decision is based on defense. Those guys sub for Perkins, more than Garnett. Doc probably thinks that Davis can defend centers better. Why Scalabrine gets the call, though, is a mystery.

  53. Thomas B.

    its that type of thinking that has had us stuck in salary cap hell. No one is untradable on this roster and that includes Lee.

    Not quite. We are stuck in salary cap hell – I’d say purgatory because the end is in sight – because of what we traded for. It all started with the Ewing for Glen Rice trade. When Ewing wanted out we had the option of just letting him walk, or finding a player with the salary to match in a trade.

    Since trading Ewing, Layden and Thomas have been trying to hit a home run to fix the problem. But each time it did not work out, they took on even more bad salaries to try and fix the problem. Just about every move has been a poor attempt at a fix.

    Glen Rice was over the hill and 1 dimentional
    Antonio McDyess was not healthy coming off the knee surgery
    Marbury and Hardaway were way over priced for the talent
    Tim Thomas was way overpriced without the talent
    Van Horn not what the team needed at the time
    Houston’s extension was a bidding war between NY and NY- NY lost
    Crawford’s signing was to protect against the above-mentioned loss
    James signing was just idiotic
    Jefferies signing was just idiotic and soaked in desperation
    Francis was a very shortsighted trade
    Randolph was the price to try and correct the mistake on the Francis trade
    And there a bumnch more bad moves I did not get to, Weatherspoon, Rose (Malik and Jalen), Antonio Davis, ect.

    Look if you are going to trade Lee, then get value for him. Get a top five pick and a solid player. Lee is a proven asset, do not trade him for a “maybe he’ll be good” like Bayless.

    Or

    Keep Lee. Match the offer made to him. Sign a James or Wade. Let JJ and Curry fall off the books and get another player Like David West, Carmelo Anthony, Jason Terry, the following summer.

    It is way too early to really talk about tanking for a draft pick since we dont know who will declare or more importantly who we would be in position to pick. I say we do our best this year, and make the best pick we can with what we have. Think about this: the 23rd pick in the 2007 draft is playing better than the 6th, 7th, 9th, 18th-21st picks. The 30th pick of 2005 is playing better than at least 20 players in the same draft.

    If you get the right player do not trade him for the wrong player. Look how badly the Bulls screwed that up trading Aldridge for Thomas.

  54. Brian Cronin

    My hope is that all of these Lee rumors are simply what you would normally think – other teams wanting David Lee. That makes sense to me. Teams calling up the Knicks and seeing what they need to trade to get Lee.

    Like others, I have no real problem with trading David Lee (heck, I think I was a lot more forgiving when it comes to Lee trades than others – I was willing to do Mike Conley and Memphis’ pick – and that trade probably would have sucked).

    It’s that I/we worry that the Knicks will not receive good enough value for him, and if they don’t, they should not trade him.

    And I honestly think that is what is happening – Walsh is willing to listen to offers (how could he not?), but so far, teams are not willing to meet his demands. My hope is that teams either continue to low ball the Knicks or else the Knicks just get an insanely awesome offer.

  55. Owen

    “My hope is that teams either continue to low ball the Knicks or else the Knicks just get an insanely awesome offer.”

    What would qualify as an insanely good offer? What is the best case scenario for a Lee trade?

  56. 2010

    “What is the best case scenario for a Lee trade?”

    theres two things being debated here. (1)should lee be traded and (2)what is is value?

    i disagree with Caleb and a few other posters and feel he should be traded. i think he is a great player but i think he would be over paid at 10 mil. i agree that we would not be able to get the same value back for him or that we could hope to replace him with a player we draft unless we get extreemly lucky. but i still feel the knicks would be better off with draft picks and cap space for two max players in ’10 than only be able to sign one in 10 and one in 11.

    as far as his value, i think hes worth about a prospect and a lotto pick or a prospect and two late first rounders. the problem is the only teams that would be looking to add him for the playoffs is the type of team that will have a crappy pick. we need to look for a team that has someone else’s first round pick that will likely turn into a lotto pick.

    i wish walsh signed him to a good long term deal before the summer and we wouldnt have to worry about this because then i dont think anyone would be talking about moving him.

  57. ess-dog

    “My hope is that teams either continue to low ball the Knicks or else the Knicks just get an insanely awesome offer.”
    What would qualify as an insanely good offer? What is the best case scenario for a Lee trade?

    Mike Conley, Hakim Warrick, and Memphis’ 1st round pick? That still might be too risky…

  58. 2010

    Is there a mistake on the advance stat page? Amare Stoudemire is listed twice and listed as traded.

    sorry if this was already addressed in an earlier post.

  59. 2010

    is there an error on the advance stat page? i think Amare Stoudemire is listed twice and listed as traded.

    sorry if this has already been addressed in an earlier post that i missed

  60. Brian Cronin

    David Lee is “worth” $10 million, or at least he is comparable to players who are making that much or more (signed on recent contracts, of course).

    Better yet, David Lee at $10 million is like Gerald Wallace making just under $10 million. The team that is paying them that money might want to go another route, but the salary being paid to the player is not keeping the team from making any deals. Gerald Wallace is not a Bobcat because no one is willing to take him off the Bobcats’ hands for cap space – he’s a Bobcat because they haven’t seen a deal they like enough. Lee on the Knicks at $10 million would be the same thing. If they decide to later dump him for cap space because they think they actually have a shot at, say, Chris Bosh and Lebron James, his salary would not be an issue.

  61. Brian Cronin

    What would qualify as an insanely good offer? What is the best case scenario for a Lee trade?

    A young player who could be nearly as good as Lee and either a high first rounder or two first rounders.

    That’s why it’s hilarious seeing Blazer blogs where people are going, “We can’t let them have Sergio for Lee!” Sergio??! The notion that Sergio (he of the .474 TS%) would get you Lee is absurd. Anything short of Rudy (or a nice package from a third team, of course) would be ridiculous. The idea that they could get Lee without sending their promising young guard who doesn’t even start for them normally – preposterous (unless, of course, they work in a third team).

    And that’s why the deal wouldn’t work, because Portland rightfully will not trade Rudy, because they’re hoping the Knicks are willing to take low ball offers for Lee. Like the rumor about Channing freakin’ Frye and a 34-year-old Marcus Camby. What the hell kind of offer was that?!? A guy who won’t be good when the Knicks are prime for free agents and the guy the Knicks traded because he wasn’t as good as Lee?!?

  62. Frank

    I think Lee is definitely worth $10MM. What I’m not sure he’s worth is a shot at 2 max free agents. I truly believe that we have a strong chance at getting Lebron + Bosh, especially if Cleveland wins a championship and it seems less like he’s just totally selling out his hometown. But I think the chance of 2 max FAs is much less if we resign Lee. I would much rather have Lebron and another max free agent (Wade/Bosh/Stoudemire etc.) than Lebron, Lee, and a mid-level free agent.

  63. Brian Cronin

    Right, Frank, but I think that’s the greater issue here – if the Knicks feel that they have a shot at a second MAX free agent then they can always trade Lee at the deadline next year for cap room.

    Lee at $10 mil is easy to move.

  64. Z

    Blazers get: Lee, Roberson, Rose, Marbury

    Kings get: Robinson, Jeffries, LaFrentz, Frye

    Knicks get: Bayless, Przybilla, Kenny Thomas, Brad Miller, Mikki Moore, Portland’s 1st round pick, King’s 1st round protected pick.

    Blazers get their man, plus shed $18 million off next year’s cap to resign Lee.

    Kings shed $14 million off next year’s cap and get Nate Robinson and Channing Frye to either sign if they like or let walk at no cost.

    Knicks get a lot of garbage, of course, but also get Bayless and Przybilla and a few picks at on the cost of Przybilla past 2010. Avoid having to pay Lee and Robinson. Dump Jeffries.

    Any takers?

  65. Brian Cronin

    It’s not a bad trade, but I still want the Knicks to get at least one player who is close to Lee.

    Bayless will likely never be nearly as good as Lee.

    And the Knicks also lose Robinson at the same time?

    I don’t like it. I do like getting Sacramento’s pick, but you’re right that in this instance, they would have to have it be protected.

  66. ess-dog

    I’m guessing Donnie isn’t going to want a player from the last draft that went lower than our #6 pick… if we like Bayless so much now, why didn’t we draft him back then? I think a 2nd or 3rd year player is more likely if a move is made. As far as the above trade, why would Sacto give up a pretty good draft pick for Nate (a #21) and junk?
    I think Lee would look great next to Bosh. Then, if we miss out on LeBron, we could go for Wade or even Joe Johnson and still field a great team. Bosh, Lee, Chandler/Gallinari, J.Johnson/Wade and Duhon/Rubio? Fuggetaboutit!

  67. Caleb

    Z,

    I’d do it – but it’s a very expensive trade with marbs/miller involved – so unlikely. Still, we would amerge with close to 35m in 2010 cap space. Solid. And while we wouldn’t get anyone near as good as lee, we’d have the equivalent of 3 1st-rounders (incl bayless) to soften the blow.

    the kings would love saving the dough, plus nate is a mid-1st talent in my book.level of pick protection would be tough bargaining point.

  68. Caleb

    Ps you can bet that utah is licking their chops over this one (if a state has chps).

    Here’s another simpler deal:

    Blazers get Lee

    Clips get Jeffries, rudy fernandez and Sergio

    Z6ers get camby and QRich

    Knicks get dalembert and….. Mareesse speights

  69. ess-dog

    Interesting trade idea from Dime:

    Kenny Thomas and Brad Miller for Marbury. Basically a salary dump and we rent a few players until 2010. And Marbury doesn’t get to go to his beloved Celtics. Heh.

  70. jon abbey

    ugh, keep those stiffs out of here. I can’t stand Brad Miller, always one of my least favorite players in the league.

  71. Caleb

    Kenny Thomas and Brad Miller for Marbury. Basically a salary dump and we rent a few players until 2010. And Marbury doesn’t get to go to his beloved Celtics. Heh.

    Assume you mean the Knicks would get a draft pick out of it.

    THat’s been floating around for a while – Wizards are a similar option for a Marbury swap. Problem is, with luxury tax it’s basically paying $40 million for a draft pick. Or $40 million for a Brad Miller rental, without the pick. Yeesh. As a fan, I don’t care about the money, but realistically, it’s more likely we deal with someone like Minnesota where some of the returning contracts would expire this year, instead of all in 2010.

  72. TDM

    Berman also floats the rumor that Portland may be interested in Curry. Can’t see that happening until he gets some pt. However, if Mike D can do for Curry what he did for Zach and raise his trade value, there may be several teams lining up at the trade deadline.

  73. ess-dog

    Here’s the trade mentioned by marBerman today:
    http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=2772~703~2817~739~3417~2754~125~312~3442&teams=22~12~22~12~18~18~18~18~18&te=&cash=
    That said, I think these trades are all nuts. The only trade I would make today would one that rids the Knicks of marbury for picks or other expiring deals.

    I don’t totally hate this trade. The main question mark for me is Bayless, who seems to duplicate what we have with Nate (maybe a slight upgrade eventually.) He seems like a 6th man to me. And while Jordan is a physical specimen, his work ethic is in question. A draft pick thrown in would make it really tempting, but I still think keeping Lee sounds best.

  74. Gian Casimiro (SSoM) Post author

    The main question mark for me is Bayless, who seems to duplicate what we have with Nate (maybe a slight upgrade eventually.) He seems like a 6th man to me.

    I was thinking the same thing. And if we take it further, Bayless could step right in and take Nate’s role next season meaning the Knicks wouldn’t have to pay Nate. But yeah, above all else, I’d prefer to keep Lee.

  75. Caleb

    http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=1717~2772~703~991~2387~512~1725~3460~3204~3025~125&teams=12~22~20~18~12~22~18~18~12~12~20&te=&cash=

    Similar to Berman’s – but better! ANd more fun!

    Knicks get Mareesse Speights, Sam Dalembert & Kareem Rush

    Blazers get David Lee & Donyell Marshall

    Clippers get Rudy Fernandez, Sergio Rodriguez, Jared Jeffries & Royal Ivey

    76ers get Marcus Camby & Quentin Richardson

    Knicks basically swap big men (Lee for Speights), get a good defensive center for the next 2 years and gain an extra $15 million in 2010 cap room. As minor benefit, get Rush to play some guard minutes. (we’re extra thin without QRich)

    Sixers, assuming they’e still in win-now mode, trade hot prospect Speights for immediate anchor in Camby. They’re willing to sacrifice Dalembert because they have Brand; they also need an extra wing and QRich is decent consolation prize (and cheaper than Sam). If they’re willing to wait a few weeks, can do the same trade subbing Tim Thomas for Q.

    Blazers get Lee relatively cheap — Rudy Fernandez and a backup PG.

    Clippers trade old guy Camby for good young prospect Fernandez. And a decent PG prospect. They eat Jeffries’ contract, but they’re capped out in 2010-2011 anyway. He might even be an upgrade — they’re starting Mardy Collins at the 3! It’s great return considering they got Camby for a 2nd-rounder, and if they’re greedy they could demand Portland’s (late) 1st-rounder. Still a cheap-ish deal for Portland.

    Potential obstacle: What if Sixers aim in different direction, build trade around a swap of Andre Miller for Baron Davis?

  76. Ben R

    TDM – Why not just cut Portland out of the trade. It seems to me that Portland is ripping off the Knicks – Lee for Frye and Bayless and the Knicks are ripping off LA – Q Rich and Rose for Camby, Jordan and Hart. The only team that this good for is Portland who gets easily the best player in the trade and gives up nothing but two third stingers.

    Caleb – If we are going to trade with Portland and they are willing to move Rudy we need to be the team getting him. I like Spieghts but I think Rudy is easily the best player other than Lee in that trade. I also think the Clippers are getting way too much for Camby, who while still playing great is 34. So far Rudy is one of the best rookies this year and I easily would put him in the top five rookies, probably top three and I could make a strong argument for him as the second best rookie, behind Mayo.

    If we could replace Rudy and Sergio with Nate and Rush and end up getting Rudy, Speights and Sergio then I think that is great value for Nate and Lee. But I do not think that the Blazers will trade Rudy for Lee or anyone else for that matter they are really high on him.

  77. Ben R

    TDM – Why not just remove Portland from the trade. I think that Portland is ripping off the Knicks – Lee for Frye and Bayless and then the Knicks are ripping off LA – Q Rich and Rose for Camby, Jordan and Hart. In fact I think the only team ending up ahead is Portland who gets far and away the best player in the deal and gives up nothing but two third stringers.

    Caleb – If Portland is willing to move Rudy we need to be the one getting him. He is easily the second best player in the trade behind Lee. In fact so far this year Rudy is definatly a top five rookie if not top three and I could even make a strong argument he is the second best rookie behind Mayo. I also think LA is getting way too much for a 34 year old center, no matter how talented that center may be. The way to make that trade better is give LA Nate and Rush and have us get Sergio and Rudy.

    If we can get Rudy, Spreights, and Sergio for Lee and Nate that would be good value for us. The problem is I do not think Portland would move Rudy for Lee or anyone else for that matter they are really high on him.

  78. Caleb

    Ben R,

    I like Fernandez but I like Speights better… He’s only 21, and per-40 he’s averaging 20 points and 10 rebounds, on 55% TS. Also more defensive presence than Lee, with 1.8 blocks per 40. None of it’s a surprise if you look at his college #s. I don’t think there are 5 players in last year’s draft who are better, and big guys are always harder to find than guards.

    In the past there were concerns that he might be a slacker, but he’s a potential star.. and of course will be about $9 million cheaper than Lee, for the next three years. So, I would even trade Lee for Speights straight up (with salary being the tiebreaker) but I don’t think I would trade Lee for Fernandez.

    Of course if we could get Speights AND Rudy for Lee & Nate, sure – but that doesn’t seem too realistic.

    Don’t forget I got rid of Jeffries in my deal :)

    Also, I agree that Portland is a weird destination for Lee, considering the full frontcourt they already have. But I’m just playing off the multiple rumors in the papers..

    p.s. In his chat, Chad F. just suggested a trade of Curry, Lee & Jeffries for Miller & John Salmons… I’m no fan of salary dumps but that would give us nearly $40 million in 2010 cap room.. enough to start making it tempting. YOu could perhaps sign 3 All-Star level players with that.

  79. jon abbey

    “Also, I agree that Portland is a weird destination for Lee, considering the full frontcourt they already have. But I’m just playing off the multiple rumors in the papers.”

    Peter Vecsey says in today’s column there’s zero truth to these rumors.

  80. mase

    i dont understand the theory that a resigned Lee at $10M per is easily moveable next season. what am I missing when you consider we have to take back an expiring to do that trade?

  81. Brian Cronin

    i dont understand the theory that a resigned Lee at $10M per is easily moveable next season. what am I missing when you consider we have to take back an expiring to do that trade?

    I’m saying you can easily find a team with an expiring contract who would love to have David Lee at $10 million, because even if they don’t need him so much right now (like say if they suck) they can always flip him for prospects.

    He’s in the same boat as Gerald Wallace. You’re never “stuck” with a guy like Wallace or Lee, even at almost $10 million/$10 million. If you really want to dump them for cap space, you can do it.

  82. Z

    Caleb–

    “I’d do it – but it’s a very expensive trade with marbs/miller involved – so unlikely.”

    Yeah, it’s expensive, but it’s not like paying $30 million to buy the draft pick that you use to draft a guy that you trade 24 months later for nothing but a roster spot… In this fake trade we’d be paying to get a young player, a few picks, a starting center, and getting rid of Jeffries. That could be worth paying the taxes on.

    “Clippers trade old guy Camby for good young prospect…”

    Boy, if the Clips trade for Randolph and trade Camby the same season, they may as well hire Scott Layden as their GM. Camby is the only Clipper that cares at all about winning. Sure, it makes basketball sense, but at some point they owe their fan(s?) to have at least one guy they can root for. They thought they had that in Brand, but they hate his guts now. They thought they were getting that with Baron, but they hate his guts now. They need Camby there, big time.

    “Potential obstacle: What if Sixers aim in different direction, build trade around a swap of Andre Miller for Baron Davis?”

    That would be wild. Baron came to LA to play with Brand. Clippers fans hate both those guys. If they ended up in Philadelphia together (and started winning), they might blow up the Staples Center when the Sixers come to town…

    “I agree that Portland is a weird destination for Lee, considering the full frontcourt they already have. But I’m just playing off the multiple rumors in the papers.”

    Portland makes sense because they have tons of assets that we would like to have ourselves.

    The rumor that really doesn’t make sense is the Eddy Curry to Portland one. They have two much better centers than Curry already on the roster for the long run. Why would they ever want or need Curry?

    I love all this made up trade talk. I think I like it more than the actual games…

  83. Brian Cronin

    I think Fernandez would be, if not my ideal pick, definitely one of the top guys I’d want back in a “One young player nearly as good as Lee and either 1 good first round pick or two first round picks period” deal, which I think has to be what the Knicks get for Lee.

    But sure, I’d be fine with Spreights as well.

  84. Ben R

    Spreights and an asset might be okay for Lee but he is averaging almost 3 less rebounds per 36. Also the other problem with the trade is if we get back Dalembert we are actually making our 2010 cap situation worse not better and I would rather have a very tradable Lee making 8-10 million than an untradable Dalembert making 10 million. If we have to take back a contract like Dalembert and give up Lee and Nate I do not think getting Speights and Rudy is too much to ask.

    I see as much potential in Rudy and less risk and he is playing alot more minutes than Speights and even though he is on a mini slump his TS% is still above 58%. Speights sample is also half the size of Rudy’s, less than 500 minutes and I think Rudy is custom made for D’Antoni’s system.

    With all that said I would still rather keep Lee than get either one of them, both of course I pull the trigger, but as you said that is unrealistic.

    Bottom line is in my opinion the Knicks should keep Lee, teams keep good young players because getting equal value is hard. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, don’t trade away our only legitimatly good young player for the chance, most likely slim chance, of landing two better ones in 2010.

  85. TDM

    TDM – Why not just remove Portland from the trade. I think that Portland is ripping off the Knicks – Lee for Frye and Bayless and then the Knicks are ripping off LA – Q Rich and Rose for Camby, Jordan and Hart. In fact I think the only team ending up ahead is Portland who gets far and away the best player in the deal and gives up nothing but two third stringers.

    I totally agree. I think the whole thing is a load of bull. It doesn’t make the Knicks a substantially better team, or substantially improve the Knicks position for the 2010 offseason. I only hope that Berman is correct about Portland being interested in Curry. Are they really that desperate for a low post scorer that doesn’t rebound? Who would they play him alongside? Oden? Aldridge?

  86. Thomas B.

    I dont like Marbury for Thomas and Miller. Yes, its not my money, so if the Knicks want to bring on an extra year of salary and help Sacto shed 18 million fine. But why not help ourselves in this deal?

    Why not Rose, JJ, and JJ for Thomas and Miller?

    Sacto gets an 8 million dollar expiring contract this year, a buy out candidate for next year, and guy who might be worth more to them than KT is right now. They do take on an extra year of Jared’s contract, but that is balanced by the Rose contract that expires this year.

    The Knicks save another 6 million in the summer of 2010. The Marbury trade doesnt help them save money when it really counts.

  87. Brian Cronin

    I see as much potential in Rudy and less risk and he is playing alot more minutes than Speights and even though he is on a mini slump his TS% is still above 58%.

    I believe his mini-slump has gone as far as to lower his TS% below 54%.

    But yeah, at one point his TS% was out of this world for a first year player (even at the slightly advanced age of 23 years old).

    Rudy is still my top pick (of the believable offers – I mean, Derrick Rose is not going to come a-callin’, ya know?), but yeah, I’d rather just keep Lee.

  88. Ben R

    Brian – his TS% is still at 58.6% it is his efg% that dropped to just below 54% at 53.7%, both are still great numbers but earlier this year they were Nash like with a TS% of about 64% and an efg% of about 60%.

    Also his other stats are good for a two guard; 4.4 rebs, 2.7 asts, 1.2 stls, 1.8 tos, 1.7 pfs and his 14.9 pts per 36 are solid considering he is at best the number three option sometimes lower than that.

    I also agree that Rudy is my top pick if we trade Lee, (I hope we don’t as well).

Comments are closed.