I don’t think Duhon is a “long-term answer,” but I’m not nearly as concerned about him short term as a lot of the guys on the roster. I don’t see many sign-and-trade scenarios where you get a PG or SG of the future… Maybe you get back an unproven prospect you like a lot who isn’t playing well or playing at all in his current situation, but there’s a lot of downside risk there. Maybe you get a solid veteran, but either he’s a one year rental or he’s got to be worth eating 2010 cap space. Without looking back at all the sign-and-trades over the years, my gut is that teams are unwilling to give up much in sign-and-trades: picks, young prospects, and contracts of worthless players. I guess we would have to talk about specific examples.

At this point, as a 32 win team, I don’t think the Knicks can be too picky about where there talent is: they just need talent period. They don’t need to shuffle pieces around to balance the roster, they need to infuse talent. Since Lee and Nate were the team’s best players last season, the chances are higher that they’d end up with lesser talent in return, rather than greater talent. Would all depend on the exact deal, of course.

To clear the glut at forward, Al Harrington might be my first choice to trade. He’s a productive veteran with an expiring deal… I think the Knicks would have a better chance at a talent upgrade by trading Wilson Chandler for a SG than Lee/Nate… who knows though, depends how you expect WC to develop.

Now, if you want to tell me that he’s no good, even off the bench, then I can roll with that. That would be responding to the substance of my post. I don’t need to be right, just understood.

Thomas B,
I love your posts and have great respect for what you bring, but, if you don’t read it don’t quote it.

Brian,
I’m a martyr for correcting people who misunderstand my posts and write flippant replies?

do you mean Portland?

Yes, Jon, sorry! Not that the team matters that much from the Knicks perspective. I meant that offer would be over their cut-off.

Yes of course. You don’t trade above average players just to be active. There’s no need to rush anything until we get to see Hill and Douglas in action. You also want to get good value and make sure you have all the bases covered. But there’s a glut at forward now and it will get bigger if we sign Grant Hill. Something has to give eventually.

At the same time we also have long term needs at PG and SG.

It won’t be difficult to upgrade the SG position over Hughes as soon as someone is available.

While Duhon is about average, I don’t think he’s the long term solution. I’m still thinking in terms Rubio at PG because I don’t think that situation is settled yet. Starting Duhon and giving Rubio time to develop would make me a happy camper, but you have to give something up to get something.

Why you calling me out ? I was responding to ess-dog’s question. My point was that Larry isn’t bad, but he is still far below the average SG in the league. Below average does not mean bad per se.

I didnt even read your post if that makes you feel better.

They should certainly consider it, but my guess is that next offseason will probably be the time to use them in a sign-and-trade. Just the other way around. A max FA would have to take less money and a year less to sign outright with the Knicks over his former team, whereas if his team knows it’s losing the guy there’s probably a certain level of talent that would convince them to sign-and-trade him.

“The team needs a starting PG and SG more than needs a PF and backup combo guard after this draft.”

Projecting draft picks based on potential is a very dangerous thing. Sure, everyone loves Toney Douglas and he might even do really well in Summer League action, but objectively the odds are against a 29 pick becoming a good NBA player. Same goes for a #8 pick, but to a lesser extent. I would at least hedge my bets.

Duhon is an adequate starter, and I don’t know that they would get an obvious upgrade in a sign-and-trade… Would a team really give up an established starting-level player in a sign-and-trade? A good one?

“They can get away with using Harrington at PF now that they have Milcic at C.”

A team with a frontcourt of Milicic and Harrington… is that really a good thing? Not that the Knicks will necessarily be good with Nate and Lee, but they were/are the team’s two best players. Unless a really attractive sign-and-trade came along, I would take my chances that a core of Lee, Nate, Danilo, Hill, Douglas, and Chandler would offer enough intrigue and sign-and-trade bait to land a big FA fish or, preferably, two next offseason. Or just develop into a good core with some other additions.

“Me no understand.”

It’s only worth posting if people take the time to read your post and pay you the respect of taking the post seriously. I felt like I added something to the conversation. If people only take time to talk to other regulars at this site, fine, I’ll talk to my wife. Just don’t assume that anyone who doesn’t live here doesn’t know what they’re talking about.