If the Knicks were trying to throw the season do you really think they would have traded Jamal Crawford for Al Harrington instead of a pick or two (plus worthless expiring contract)???????

As for trading Eddy Curry, maybe they could trade him to the Pacers for Rasho Nesterovic (one year left on his contract)? The Pacers aren’t going to be players in the 2010 Free agent market. They could use a solid scorer in the post to complement Granger and Ford. And Troy Murphy can handle grabbing the boards that Curry doesn’t. This trade could turn the Pacers into a playoff team almost immediately. Your thoughts?

“The Nets could be in a conference finals next year.”
are they going to be playing in Europe? because they’re not going to be in any conference finals in the NBA.
anyway, Thorn had a lot more to work with than Walsh did, and he was lucky he could still get Dallas to mortgage the farm for Kidd when he did, he almost missed the window on that.
I’m only going by your summary of the piece, but that seems like a typically ignorant NY Times sports editorial, spinning everything as far as they can in a certain direction in order to try to “prove” an invalid thesis. those editorials are a consistently embarrassing part of that paper, the more of their colummnists they can get to take packages, the better (at least Murray Chass is finally gone).

The NY Times b-ball reporting is definitely anti-Knick in general (they’ve also decided to remove them from the front page of the Sports section even if there is nothing else in the sports world going on) However, I do think Araton is correct in his praising of Thorn. If you just take the Carter deal (I hate the guy, but it was a steal at the time) and the Harris deal (which includes 2 number one picks, not lottery protected) that’s a pretty good resume right there. They are a very long way from a conference final, but have some nice young players and a budding superstar, whereas we have role players and cap space.

sure, Thorn’s done a nice job and should certainly be praised. I read the actual piece in the meantime, and the part about the conference finals was added by the poster above, Araton didn’t go nearly that far.

anyway, while Thorn has done a good job, Kevin Pritchard is operating in a whole different galaxy. Portland right now is so good and so young, they could lose 5 young, talented guys (including the ones still stashed in Europe), and barely notice.

Or maybe it’s the other way around–

If all he’s good for is as a reserve scorer for 2-3 years, your $30 million is probably better invested in an insured contract.

However, if you’re making him your “franchise center” for 6 years, heart problems matter less because “he’s so freakin’ awesome that he’s worth the risk! And besides- if we find someone even awsomer to play center everyone will want him as THEIR franchise center! But it won’t matter because I’m never going to trade him, ever, not in a million years, not even for Michael Jordan and Wilt Chamberlain’s 7′ 5″ love child!” (all of which must have been going through Isiah’s mind in October or 2005…)

I like your stuff a lot, but you can’t put together a post about Eddy without at least mentioning his uninsured contract in every other paragraph. This isn’t trading Zach Randolph. This permeates everything about Curry’s case at this point.

I agree that Curry’s heart condition should have been mentioned. When the Knicks signed him to 6 years and made him the “franchise center”, a heart condition is something to take notice of. However for a team that’s going to pick him up for 2-3 years as a reserve scorer I don’t see it as being that big of a deal.

Hornets get: Eddy Curry

Heat get: Brad Miller, David Lee, Jared Jeffries, Mike James

Kings get: Stephon Marbury, Malik Rose, Hilton Armstrong, Nate Robinson

Knicks get: Shawn Marion, Mark Blount, Kenny Thomas, Udonis Haslem, and Mikki Moore

hmmm…
Kings clear all their cap space this summer and get Nate Robinson too. Nice.

Hornets get Curry for nothing, except a it of extra $$. Possible

Heat give up Marion/cap space & Haslem, for Lee and a year and a half of Miller. Chalmers/Wade/Beasley/Lee/Miller… They might do better for Marion, but… maybe.

BUT!
NY comes out the loser. Basically, we give up Lee AND Nate, in order to move Curry. We get Haslem and Marion — but Marion is getting older; he’s in decline, and the money it would take to re-sign him this summer could be much better spent in 2010, 2011, etc.

Wow, we have different views on Howard and Wallace. I think they are close (as are their stats), but I would tend to favor Howard. I think he’s done more consistently and on a much better team

That doesn’t sound too different — I agree they’re pretty close, and pretty similar. Almost the same size. Same age. It’s not Wallace’s fault that his teammates are worse. He’s a better rebounder, more efficient scorer and puts up bigger numbers in blocks and steals, but of course the role is a little different. Howard has been much more durable.

“The Nets could be in a conference finals next year.”
are they going to be playing in Europe? because they’re not going to be in any conference finals in the NBA.
anyway, Thorn had a lot more to work with than Walsh did, and he was lucky he could still get Dallas to mortgage the farm for Kidd when he did, he almost missed the window on that.
I’m only going by your summary of the piece, but that seems like a typically ignorant NY Times sports editorial, spinning everything as far as they can in a certain direction in order to try to “prove” an invalid thesis. those editorials are a consistently embarrassing part of that paper, the more of their colummnists they can get to take packages, the better (at least Murray Chass is finally gone).

The NY Times b-ball reporting is definitely anti-Knick in general (they’ve also decided to remove them from the front page of the Sports section even if there is nothing else in the sports world going on) However, I do think Araton is correct in his praising of Thorn. If you just take the Carter deal (I hate the guy, but it was a steal at the time) and the Harris deal (which includes 2 number one picks, not lottery protected) that’s a pretty good resume right there. They are a very long way from a conference final, but have some nice young players and a budding superstar, whereas we have role players and cap space.