“If” we want to be more competitive this year (the short term goal) we need a defensive shot blocking center. However, I don’t see how we can get anyone of any quality without giving up someone we’d like to keep around for the long term. It doesn’t make much sense to sacrifice the long term to be better this year. Unless Walsh has something up his sleeve, I don’t see it happening.

“If” we can accomplish the first goal, we can sign both Lee and Robinson plus a couple of free agents.

“If” we can’t accomplish the first goal, it may be necessary to include either Lee or Robinson (most likely Lee) in a deal to move Curry.

The key seems to be getting Curry back in shape (LOL) so that he can play and make it more likely the Knicks can move him. Based on what I am hearing/reading though, we have a better chance of James getting in shape and playing than Curry. In fact, it sounds to me like Curry is turning into a new version of James. He wants to sit around and collect checks until his contract is over and then get a job at Burger King as a food taster.

Exactly. Why do we need to sign Nate? It’s a lot easier to find someone like him than someone like Lee. Before this year, Nate had been a below average NBA player. In 418 minutes this year, he has posted very good numbers, but that’s 16 games worth of data.

I don’t know. I think we can live without him. I also think you are muck more likely to find a replacement for Nate in the draft than for Lee.

Besides if we have to have a salary cap casualty then I would much rather have it be Nate than Lee.

Lee’s stock is as high as it is going to get.

I seriously doubt that, especially now that he’s starting.

But I’d move him for a top-8 pick, maybe top-10… saving a big chunk of money vs. the cap, without giving up talent, or much talent, long-term. It’s not Lee & Robinson vs. Bosh. It’s Lee & Robinson vs. Chance of Signing Bosh. If it came to that, there’s always a sign n trade.

If we trade Lee, won’t be the Clips – they just got a PF.

And it won’t be an unprotected pick, either. If anyone was ever tempted, they just saw what happened to Isiah.

Other questions:
Why would the Clips trade Camby for Curry?

Why would they want Curry in place of Kaman?

Why would they want Curry for any reason at all?

Why would we want Camby? (unless it’s for someone we don’t want, anyway). I guess this is controversial – after all, if he gets healthy, Marcus can still play – for now – but do we want an over-35 center on a rebuilding team? If we win a few extra games this year it only messes up our lottery odds. I’m not in favor of tanking, but I don’t want to trade for players who aren’t part of the long-term plan.

Lee and Curry to the Clips for Camby and an unprotected 2009 or 2010 draft pick?
Lee’s stock is as high as it is going to get. We need to secure a draft pick to replace to 2010 we lose the Utah. A lottery pick give us another shot at Rubio or Griffin. We get rid of Curry’s contract (11 million) and remove the worry of signing Lee (7-10 million).
Camby gives some rebounding and shot blocking, which we sorely need.
Getting Curry frees the Clips to move Caveman. Lee’s rebounding makes Curry’s less a problem. Gordon and Davis handle the scoring.

So the Clippers give up an unprotected lottery pick to reconstruct the 07-08 Knicks frontcourt? They trade for a bad center who can’t even break the Knicks’ rotation so they can trade away two solid centers?

Since when does what we post here have to make sense? I mean I spent all Saturday night/Sunday reading Lee and Duhon ? Howard and Nash. Is this trade any less plausible? Does anything done by the Clippers ever make sense? It not like I said San Antonio would fall for this mess, sheesh.

“remove the worry of signing Lee (7-10 million). ”

So worrisome. Honestly, that’s what terrifies me as a Knicks fan. That we might break with 8 years of deeply entrenched tradition and actually sign a player to a contract for less than he is worth.

I’ll try it again using small words this time..

Signing Lee and Robinson without moving Curry would take the cap space fans want for a big time free agent. My suggestion, however implausible it may be (thanks jon, you are correct the Curry/Randolph front court worked so well in NY, of course LA would jump at it!), removes the concern of losing cap space from keeping Lee (7 million was the most conservative estimate). The move also secures a lottery pick, which would be very helpful towards adding talent without overpaying to get it.

I like Lee, but I would rather have Bosh and James with Robinson, Gallo, Chandler, and two 2009 picks-one of them lottery (maybe 2 if the Knicks struggle) over James, Lee, Robinson, Chandler, Gallo, and 1 2009 pick. If moving Lee helps to secure James and Bosh, then I think you have to do it.

Whoops, I used a few words with three syllables. :-)

Lee and Curry to the Clips for Camby and an unprotected 2009 or 2010 draft pick?
Lee’s stock is as high as it is going to get. We need to secure a draft pick to replace to 2010 we lose the Utah. A lottery pick give us another shot at Rubio or Griffin. We get rid of Curry’s contract (11 million) and remove the worry of signing Lee (7-10 million).
Camby gives some rebounding and shot blocking, which we sorely need.
Getting Curry frees the Clips to move Caveman. Lee’s rebounding makes Curry’s less a problem. Gordon and Davis handle the scoring.

So the Clippers give up an unprotected lottery pick to reconstruct the 07-08 Knicks frontcourt? They trade for a bad center who can’t even break the Knicks’ rotation so they can trade away two solid centers?

So worrisome. Honestly, that’s what terrifies me as a Knicks fan. That we might break with 8 years of deeply entrenched tradition and actually sign a player to a contract for less than he is worth.