Trade Assets - Expiring Contracts

[jchen1731]

Offer them Scal, Tony, Eddie, Pruitt, Giddens and Walker (all expiring) for Curry (who we can move next offseason), Gallinari and the #8 pick

Curry is a decent post scorer... but attitude, condition, rebounding and defense are going to put him in Doc's dog house... I rather have powe/baby playing than curry!

[LarBrd33]

I had an idea I was discussing with Roy that I'll just dump into this thread too. 

What's New York's situation like?  If they resign David Lee how much cap room are they looking at in the summer of 2010 (where the rumor has been that Bron, Wade and Bosh could all decide to come play there)?  Eddie Curry's 10 mil is still a small problem, right?  How badly do they want to get rid of Eddie Curry's 10 mil?  Bad enough to give up the #8 pick in order to dump Curry for 10 mil in 2010 expirings?

Offer them Scal, Tony, Eddie, Pruitt, Giddens and Walker (all expiring) for Curry (who we can move next offseason), Gallinari and the #8 pick

Then the Knicks can give David Lee his money and still have enough money to probably sign 3 max contract guys in 2010.

How badly do we want the #8 pick? These are the #8 picks since the year 2000: Crawford, Diop, Wilcox, Ford, Araujo, Frye, Gay, Wright, and Alexander. Thus far, Wright and Alexander have been busts. Araujo was never a NBA talent. No one really knows how or why he was picked so high. Wilcox and Frye are end of the bench players. Diop has been a decent backup sometimes. Ford is a pretty good point guard, but he's always hurt. The only players you can classify as "good" are Crawford and Gay. My point is, historically, the #8 pick guarantees squat. Even if we were lucky enough to get a good player--like a Gay--he might not even contribute his first year. I don't think the potential reward of finding a good player at #8, which historically seems hard to do, is worth swallowing Curry's contract and attitude. I do, however, like the creativity.

This is exactly what Danny should try telling New York when he attempts to rob them of the #8 pick by sending 6 garbage players.

[jchen1731]

Why does Scal get thrown in to every trade? The man brings a unique skillset to the table and is extremely undervalued/unappreciated IMO.

Of course we want to keep scal! Just talking about trade assets right now... looking for a team to dump salary... and the trade won't work without Scal!

[jchen1731]

By the way, anyone for a return tour of james posey?

[wiley]

By the way, anyone for a return tour of james posey?

Me.  For what he can do in the playoffs, his contract's not so bad.

Also, people who nix all deals involving Ray Allen so that he can hit game winners might relax some if you bring back Posey.   We needed Ray's game winners this year because Garnett was out and so many games were close.  Once Garnett is back, we'll go back to winning more easily much of the time.  But last year's endgame unit of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, Posey and Garnett was a potent force.  Wouldn't mind a re-do.  Also in favor of Nocioni and his ilk, though he appears to be the best of his ilk that we have a shot at.

[Jon]

By the way, anyone for a return tour of james posey?

Me.  For what he can do in the playoffs, his contract's not so bad.

Also, people who nix all deals involving Ray Allen so that he can hit game winners might relax some if you bring back Posey.   We needed Ray's game winners this year because Garnett was out and so many games were close.  Once Garnett is back, we'll go back to winning more easily much of the time.  But last year's endgame unit of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, Posey and Garnett was a potent force.  Wouldn't mind a re-do.  Also in favor of Nocioni and his ilk, though he appears to be the best of his ilk that we have a shot at.

I'm for the return of Posey, but it wouldn't relax me about trading Ray.  To me, the true value of Ray is that when he's on the court with the rest of the starting 5 we clearly have the best starting 5 in basketball.  While all these trades improve our bench and rotation, we then lose the best starting 5.  And while that may seem like a good thing to some, it really isn't.  One of the big reasons the C's were able to win it all in '08 was because in big playoff games, the starting 5 was able to close games out when it mattered. 

Do we need to improve our bench?  Yes.  But there's ways to do it that don't involve disassembling the best starting 5 in the game. 

[wiley]

By the way, anyone for a return tour of james posey?

Me.  For what he can do in the playoffs, his contract's not so bad.

Also, people who nix all deals involving Ray Allen so that he can hit game winners might relax some if you bring back Posey.   We needed Ray's game winners this year because Garnett was out and so many games were close.  Once Garnett is back, we'll go back to winning more easily much of the time.  But last year's endgame unit of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, Posey and Garnett was a potent force.  Wouldn't mind a re-do.  Also in favor of Nocioni and his ilk, though he appears to be the best of his ilk that we have a shot at.

I'm for the return of Posey, but it wouldn't relax me about trading Ray.  To me, the true value of Ray is that when he's on the court with the rest of the starting 5 we clearly have the best starting 5 in basketball.  While all these trades improve our bench and rotation, we then lose the best starting 5.  And while that may seem like a good thing to some, it really isn't.  One of the big reasons the C's were able to win it all in '08 was because in big playoff games, the starting 5 was able to close games out when it mattered. 

Do we need to improve our bench?  Yes.  But there's ways to do it that don't involve disassembling the best starting 5 in the game. 

You're right that there's nothing relaxing about trading Ray Allen.  My bad.  Even good looking deals are a gamble.  I don't believe that trading Ray is inconceivable, I just think it's so hard that the percentage chance of it happening is closer to zero than 10.  Reducing wear and tear on Ray and Paul is the safest way forward.  I think if Ray's minutes are cut down during the season he may even feel springy enough to do some dunking in the playoffs.  The thought makes me smile.

[slamtheking]

I had an idea I was discussing with Roy that I'll just dump into this thread too. 

What's New York's situation like?  If they resign David Lee how much cap room are they looking at in the summer of 2010 (where the rumor has been that Bron, Wade and Bosh could all decide to come play there)?  Eddie Curry's 10 mil is still a small problem, right?  How badly do they want to get rid of Eddie Curry's 10 mil?  Bad enough to give up the #8 pick in order to dump Curry for 10 mil in 2010 expirings?

Offer them Scal, Tony, Eddie, Pruitt, Giddens and Walker (all expiring) for Curry (who we can move next offseason), Gallinari and the #8 pick

Then the Knicks can give David Lee his money and still have enough money to probably sign 3 max contract guys in 2010.

I don't think NY attaches both Gallinari and the #8 to move Curry. And I'm not even sure I'd want that package in return for our expirings.

NY also has Jared Jeffries signed for this next season and a PO for the following. He's no great shakes, but he could be an option for us off the bench. NY would probably have to sweeten the deal a little bit.

Probably true that NY wouldn't do it, but I'd still offer it. 

Maybe throw in a future 1st.  They could have 3 young prospects (giddens, walker, pruitt) + a future protected 1st... and we do them a favor of taking Curry off their hands.  The #8 pick in a weak draft isn't that spectacular.  And Gallinari is nothing but a project right now.

so, why exactly do the C's do this trade?
Curry is unmotivated to do anything but collect his paycheck.  too much money for a lazy backup 5.  Gallinari hasn't done anything to date so he's not particularly valuable for building the bench.  The #8 pick in a crappy draft wouldn't crack the rotation on a good team but now that you've cleared out the bench, you're now relying on major production from Gallinari and this draft pick.

Knicks would jump at this because it's so lopsided in their favor.  Out from a bad Curr contract, lots of expiring money, out from a high draft pick in Gallinari that hasn't produced yet and no commitment to mandatory draft pick money for a player this year that doesn't figure to be better than a low-level bench player in the future.

Horrible idea

[Evantime34]

I had an idea I was discussing with Roy that I'll just dump into this thread too. 

What's New York's situation like?  If they resign David Lee how much cap room are they looking at in the summer of 2010 (where the rumor has been that Bron, Wade and Bosh could all decide to come play there)?  Eddie Curry's 10 mil is still a small problem, right?  How badly do they want to get rid of Eddie Curry's 10 mil?  Bad enough to give up the #8 pick in order to dump Curry for 10 mil in 2010 expirings?

Offer them Scal, Tony, Eddie, Pruitt, Giddens and Walker (all expiring) for Curry (who we can move next offseason), Gallinari and the #8 pick

Then the Knicks can give David Lee his money and still have enough money to probably sign 3 max contract guys in 2010.

I don't think NY attaches both Gallinari and the #8 to move Curry. And I'm not even sure I'd want that package in return for our expirings.

NY also has Jared Jeffries signed for this next season and a PO for the following. He's no great shakes, but he could be an option for us off the bench. NY would probably have to sweeten the deal a little bit.

Probably true that NY wouldn't do it, but I'd still offer it. 

Maybe throw in a future 1st.  They could have 3 young prospects (giddens, walker, pruitt) + a future protected 1st... and we do them a favor of taking Curry off their hands.  The #8 pick in a weak draft isn't that spectacular.  And Gallinari is nothing but a project right now.

so, why exactly do the C's do this trade?
Curry is unmotivated to do anything but collect his paycheck.  too much money for a lazy backup 5.  Gallinari hasn't done anything to date so he's not particularly valuable for building the bench.  The #8 pick in a crappy draft wouldn't crack the rotation on a good team but now that you've cleared out the bench, you're now relying on major production from Gallinari and this draft pick.

Knicks would jump at this because it's so lopsided in their favor.  Out from a bad Curr contract, lots of expiring money, out from a high draft pick in Gallinari that hasn't produced yet and no commitment to mandatory draft pick money for a player this year that doesn't figure to be better than a low-level bench player in the future.

Horrible idea

I think you're too hard on him. Gallinari and the 8th could build the future of the team that would allow PP and Ray to rest more and prolong there careers. I think even with how lazy and fat Curry is, he would still be more valuable as a backup bigman working with KG and Perk than Scal, TA and Giddens. He could even resurrect his career on the C's.

[jchen1731]

By the way, anyone for a return tour of james posey?

Me.  For what he can do in the playoffs, his contract's not so bad.

Also, people who nix all deals involving Ray Allen so that he can hit game winners might relax some if you bring back Posey.   We needed Ray's game winners this year because Garnett was out and so many games were close.  Once Garnett is back, we'll go back to winning more easily much of the time.  But last year's endgame unit of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, Posey and Garnett was a potent force.  Wouldn't mind a re-do.  Also in favor of Nocioni and his ilk, though he appears to be the best of his ilk that we have a shot at.

I'm for the return of Posey, but it wouldn't relax me about trading Ray.  To me, the true value of Ray is that when he's on the court with the rest of the starting 5 we clearly have the best starting 5 in basketball.  While all these trades improve our bench and rotation, we then lose the best starting 5.  And while that may seem like a good thing to some, it really isn't.  One of the big reasons the C's were able to win it all in '08 was because in big playoff games, the starting 5 was able to close games out when it mattered. 

Do we need to improve our bench?  Yes.  But there's ways to do it that don't involve disassembling the best starting 5 in the game. 

I don't understand. I am not suggesting trading ray allen for posey, but rather scal/TA/Pick for Posey

[wiley]

By the way, anyone for a return tour of james posey?

Me.  For what he can do in the playoffs, his contract's not so bad.

Also, people who nix all deals involving Ray Allen so that he can hit game winners might relax some if you bring back Posey.   We needed Ray's game winners this year because Garnett was out and so many games were close.  Once Garnett is back, we'll go back to winning more easily much of the time.  But last year's endgame unit of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, Posey and Garnett was a potent force.  Wouldn't mind a re-do.  Also in favor of Nocioni and his ilk, though he appears to be the best of his ilk that we have a shot at.

I'm for the return of Posey, but it wouldn't relax me about trading Ray.  To me, the true value of Ray is that when he's on the court with the rest of the starting 5 we clearly have the best starting 5 in basketball.  While all these trades improve our bench and rotation, we then lose the best starting 5.  And while that may seem like a good thing to some, it really isn't.  One of the big reasons the C's were able to win it all in '08 was because in big playoff games, the starting 5 was able to close games out when it mattered. 

Do we need to improve our bench?  Yes.  But there's ways to do it that don't involve disassembling the best starting 5 in the game. 

I don't understand. I am not suggesting trading ray allen for posey, but rather scal/TA/Pick for Posey

Yes, that was a diversion within the thread. 

I'd like to get Posey back, even if it meant a sign and trade with Baby, because then McDyess could snuggle into the backup 4 spot.  Then get a 7 footer to help spell the 3-man big rotation.

[Chief]

Looks like if your going to win the title your going to go through Lebron, Rashard, Carmello, or Kobe. So you need someone to help guard those guys. My choice is Stephen Jackson. You could try the Scal, Tony, and Gabe trade or this one:

Ray Allen
Scalabine
Pruitt

for

Jackson
Maggette
Turiaf

It would give us a defensive stopper, sixth man, and a good backup big man.

Rondo
Pierce
Jackson
KG
Perk

House
Walker
Maggette
Turiaf
Big Baby

Danny could spend the MLE on another big or a pg.

[gar]

I think that the situations at SF and Center are critical. PP is going to drop off significantly given wear and tear of last season. We need size against teams like Orlando, Cleveland and LA pure and simple. Like the Diaw idea if he can play SF; but he was a crucial piece of the Bobcats late season run and would not come cheap.

[slamtheking]

I had an idea I was discussing with Roy that I'll just dump into this thread too. 

What's New York's situation like?  If they resign David Lee how much cap room are they looking at in the summer of 2010 (where the rumor has been that Bron, Wade and Bosh could all decide to come play there)?  Eddie Curry's 10 mil is still a small problem, right?  How badly do they want to get rid of Eddie Curry's 10 mil?  Bad enough to give up the #8 pick in order to dump Curry for 10 mil in 2010 expirings?

Offer them Scal, Tony, Eddie, Pruitt, Giddens and Walker (all expiring) for Curry (who we can move next offseason), Gallinari and the #8 pick

Then the Knicks can give David Lee his money and still have enough money to probably sign 3 max contract guys in 2010.

I don't think NY attaches both Gallinari and the #8 to move Curry. And I'm not even sure I'd want that package in return for our expirings.

NY also has Jared Jeffries signed for this next season and a PO for the following. He's no great shakes, but he could be an option for us off the bench. NY would probably have to sweeten the deal a little bit.

Probably true that NY wouldn't do it, but I'd still offer it. 

Maybe throw in a future 1st.  They could have 3 young prospects (giddens, walker, pruitt) + a future protected 1st... and we do them a favor of taking Curry off their hands.  The #8 pick in a weak draft isn't that spectacular.  And Gallinari is nothing but a project right now.

so, why exactly do the C's do this trade?
Curry is unmotivated to do anything but collect his paycheck.  too much money for a lazy backup 5.  Gallinari hasn't done anything to date so he's not particularly valuable for building the bench.  The #8 pick in a crappy draft wouldn't crack the rotation on a good team but now that you've cleared out the bench, you're now relying on major production from Gallinari and this draft pick.

Knicks would jump at this because it's so lopsided in their favor.  Out from a bad Curr contract, lots of expiring money, out from a high draft pick in Gallinari that hasn't produced yet and no commitment to mandatory draft pick money for a player this year that doesn't figure to be better than a low-level bench player in the future.

Horrible idea

I think you're too hard on him. Gallinari and the 8th could build the future of the team that would allow PP and Ray to rest more and prolong there careers. I think even with how lazy and fat Curry is, he would still be more valuable as a backup bigman working with KG and Perk than Scal, TA and Giddens. He could even resurrect his career on the C's.

I think you're being very optimistic that Gallinari and #8 pick in a weak draft will spare Ray and PP some minutes.  Gallinari may have been picked ahead of Walker and Giddens but I didn't see anything from him to suggest he'd beat out Walker for PT.  #8 pick will be just another rookie getting ignored by Doc on the bench or spending time in the D league.

I think we can do better than Curry (lazy, non-competitive, self-absorbed "athlete") for a back up big just using the MLE.  There's just no basis to think he'll turn things around in Boston.  With his contract, the C's really can't afford that gamble, especially for their only real trade chips-->their expiring contracts.  I think the C's could get a good back up wing for the expiring deals instead (provided they can get one of Sheed/Mcdyess/Zaza to sign as a FA). 

[hpantazo]

I had an idea I was discussing with Roy that I'll just dump into this thread too. 

What's New York's situation like?  If they resign David Lee how much cap room are they looking at in the summer of 2010 (where the rumor has been that Bron, Wade and Bosh could all decide to come play there)?  Eddie Curry's 10 mil is still a small problem, right?  How badly do they want to get rid of Eddie Curry's 10 mil?  Bad enough to give up the #8 pick in order to dump Curry for 10 mil in 2010 expirings?

Offer them Scal, Tony, Eddie, Pruitt, Giddens and Walker (all expiring) for Curry (who we can move next offseason), Gallinari and the #8 pick

Then the Knicks can give David Lee his money and still have enough money to probably sign 3 max contract guys in 2010.

I don't think NY attaches both Gallinari and the #8 to move Curry. And I'm not even sure I'd want that package in return for our expirings.

NY also has Jared Jeffries signed for this next season and a PO for the following. He's no great shakes, but he could be an option for us off the bench. NY would probably have to sweeten the deal a little bit.

Probably true that NY wouldn't do it, but I'd still offer it. 

Maybe throw in a future 1st.  They could have 3 young prospects (giddens, walker, pruitt) + a future protected 1st... and we do them a favor of taking Curry off their hands.  The #8 pick in a weak draft isn't that spectacular.  And Gallinari is nothing but a project right now.

so, why exactly do the C's do this trade?
Curry is unmotivated to do anything but collect his paycheck.  too much money for a lazy backup 5.  Gallinari hasn't done anything to date so he's not particularly valuable for building the bench.  The #8 pick in a crappy draft wouldn't crack the rotation on a good team but now that you've cleared out the bench, you're now relying on major production from Gallinari and this draft pick.

Knicks would jump at this because it's so lopsided in their favor.  Out from a bad Curr contract, lots of expiring money, out from a high draft pick in Gallinari that hasn't produced yet and no commitment to mandatory draft pick money for a player this year that doesn't figure to be better than a low-level bench player in the future.

Horrible idea

I think you're too hard on him. Gallinari and the 8th could build the future of the team that would allow PP and Ray to rest more and prolong there careers. I think even with how lazy and fat Curry is, he would still be more valuable as a backup bigman working with KG and Perk than Scal, TA and Giddens. He could even resurrect his career on the C's.

I think you're being very optimistic that Gallinari and #8 pick in a weak draft will spare Ray and PP some minutes.  Gallinari may have been picked ahead of Walker and Giddens but I didn't see anything from him to suggest he'd beat out Walker for PT.  #8 pick will be just another rookie getting ignored by Doc on the bench or spending time in the D league.

I think we can do better than Curry (lazy, non-competitive, self-absorbed "athlete") for a back up big just using the MLE.  There's just no basis to think he'll turn things around in Boston.  With his contract, the C's really can't afford that gamble, especially for their only real trade chips-->their expiring contracts.  I think the C's could get a good back up wing for the expiring deals instead (provided they can get one of Sheed/Mcdyess/Zaza to sign as a FA). 

also, Gallinari, at his age, already has some serious health concerns.