If getting young for Ray fails......how about this?

[csfansince60s]

If Iggy, Deng, Monta, KevMartin, or some Wash combo of Jamison/Miller/Butler fail, how about this fall back, rent a vet deal with the Knicks? This was posted by a Celtics poster on the Knicks RealGM board and was embraced by most Knicks fans there. I also like it as a fall back position:


Al,Nate,JJ for R.Allen,House,Pick - idea?

Postby klemen4 on Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:08 pm
Ok just my idea, but what do you think:

Harrington, Jeffries, Robinson
for
Allen+exp.(Lets say House)+first rounder... with Ray returning to Bos after buyout.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachi ... Id=yzkknu9

BOSTON:
This if financially the best trade...both Harrington and Robinson being expiring,...ok Bos take 6,8 mio Jeffries 2010 but at least he can defend multiple positions. Bos first rounder should be included to make the deal work.

NEW YORK:
The thing is....if NY trade Jeffreis that leaves them with cap space of one max at 16,6 mio and a room of 14,7 mio for 2nd near max player or multiple FA. Also trading Jeffries they can take Lee 10,5 mio cap hit meaning they can offer him even more money but the cap hit would be 10,5 mio.

Harrington and Robinson are both instant offense, ok both chuckers but would suit great in that 6 man of the bench spot. Jeffries give s defense. So I think in the end NY probably would give them away for sake of clearing Jeffries 6,8 mio contract of the books. Of course buying our Ray that he can return to BOS in necessary in this deal.

I dont know...looks like no one thought of this deal, but maybe now that McGrady to NY in a 3 way is not possible, NY will look around.

What do you think???

[More Banners]

Um...no.

-I'm not giving up a pick (the future) and Ray Allen (key starter) for this bundle of bench players.

-I don't think we can trade our 2010 1st rounder anyway, since we didn't have our 2009.

-NY doesn't have any picks to give us.

-Nate is a bench spark/scorer, but it is becoming clearer that we need more than that.  Like a PG that both can and will move the ball without dribbling it to death (Rondo guilty there).  Nate isn't that guy.

-Al Harrington has been incredibly inconsistent for his entire career, and I have no idea why.  Not worth giving up anything for.

-J.J. would add mobility to our defense, and would fit in well there, but is clearly not worth the money.  NY wants to move him very badly, too, and I don't see why anyone would be in a hurry to take him without a nice sweetener.

Would I take Jeffries from NY?  Yeah, but I would want a prospect from them, too.  Nate doesn't qualify.  Toney Douglas and a 2nd rounder?  That'd be worth talking about, but still not for Ray.

[csfansince60s]

Um...no.

-I'm not giving up a pick (the future) and Ray Allen (key starter) for this bundle of bench players.

-I don't think we can trade our 2010 1st rounder anyway, since we didn't have our 2009.

-NY doesn't have any picks to give us.

-Nate is a bench spark/scorer, but it is becoming clearer
that we need more than that.  Like a PG that both can and will move the ball without dribbling it to death (Rondo guilty there).  Nate isn't that guy.

-Al Harrington has been incredibly inconsistent for his entire career, and I have no idea why.  Not worth giving up anything for.

-J.J. would add mobility to our defense, and would fit in well there, but is clearly not worth the money.  NY wants to move him very badly, too, and I don't see why anyone would be in a hurry to take him without a nice sweetener.

Would I take Jeffries from NY?  Yeah, but I would want a prospect from them, too.  Nate doesn't qualify.  Toney Douglas and a 2nd rounder?  That'd be worth talking about, but still not for Ray.

But we get Ray back, that is the key to the deal, and we  do this only if the aforementioned desired deals don't go down. We give up the pick to get Ray back, so the deal is only House and the pick for rent-a-Nate and rent-a-Harrington as both are expirings and Jeffries who is versatile defensively and has been playing well. We get firepower, (Nate and AH), defense (JJ) and Ray back for  a then redundant House and a late first rounder. Sounds like a good fall back deal to me. Now if we don't get Ray back, maybe we can pry something else away from them.

[More Banners]

Um...no.

-I'm not giving up a pick (the future) and Ray Allen (key starter) for this bundle of bench players.

-I don't think we can trade our 2010 1st rounder anyway, since we didn't have our 2009.

-NY doesn't have any picks to give us.

-Nate is a bench spark/scorer, but it is becoming clearer
that we need more than that.  Like a PG that both can and will move the ball without dribbling it to death (Rondo guilty there).  Nate isn't that guy.

-Al Harrington has been incredibly inconsistent for his entire career, and I have no idea why.  Not worth giving up anything for.

-J.J. would add mobility to our defense, and would fit in well there, but is clearly not worth the money.  NY wants to move him very badly, too, and I don't see why anyone would be in a hurry to take him without a nice sweetener.

Would I take Jeffries from NY?  Yeah, but I would want a prospect from them, too.  Nate doesn't qualify.  Toney Douglas and a 2nd rounder?  That'd be worth talking about, but still not for Ray.

But we get Ray back, that is the key to the deal, and we  do this only if the aforementioned desired deals don't go down. We give up the pick to get Ray back, so the deal is only House and the pick for rent-a-Nate and rent-a-Harrington as both are expirings and Jeffries who is versatile defensively and has been playing well. We get firepower, (Nate and AH), defense (JJ) and Ray back for  a then redundant House and a late first rounder. Sounds like a good fall back deal to me. Now if we don't get Ray back, maybe we can pry something else away from them.

Of course, arranging that ahead of time would be against the rules.   
Honestly, they'd probably want to keep him around.

But I still don't care for Harrington, and I like Nate-but on someone else's team.  An Jeffries isn't worth it.  We could trade Scal, TA, and Giddens for JJ, but I'd still try to wrangle a 2nd rounder out of them.  There's only so much money a team can pay for bench players like JJ.

[Eddie20]

It would be a great deal if we get RA back.

Harrington has a Jamison type game and would provide instant offense. Robinson would play a House type role. Jefferies wouldn't play much, but I do like in situational defensive matchups.

[slamdunk]

I don't think NY would buy Ray out. They wanted T-Mac because they wanted him to play for them in addition to his expiring deal. It would be the same with Ray.

[csfansince60s]

I don't think NY would buy Ray out. They wanted T-Mac because they wanted him to play for them in addition to his expiring deal. It would be the same with Ray.

We don't do the trade unless they indicate that they will buy Ray out. That's why we would be willing to take two expiring rent-a-vets to spark us this year in AH and Nate and agree to eat Jeffries contract. In retrospect, maybe they should give us a pick instead of the other way around, or we tell them to keep Nate and AH and that we want Chandler for eating JJ's contract.

[guava_wrench]

I don't think NY would buy Ray out. They wanted T-Mac because they wanted him to play for them in addition to his expiring deal. It would be the same with Ray.

We don't do the trade unless they indicate that they will buy Ray out. That's why we would be willing to take two expiring rent-a-vets to spark us this year in AH and Nate and agree to eat Jeffries contract. In retrospect, maybe they should give us a pick instead of the other way around, or we tell them to keep Nate and AH and that we want Chandler for eating JJ's contract.

They will not indicate that they will buy Ray out because that is a violation of league rules. You can't negotiate that.

Ray is not the kind of player you buy out. He is a good team guy who can still play at a very high level. The Knicks also have no reason to buy anyone out this year whose contract expires. They have plenty of money to spend. They just don't want to have any obligations when Lebron is on the market.

[csfansince60s]

I don't think NY would buy Ray out. They wanted T-Mac because they wanted him to play for them in addition to his expiring deal. It would be the same with Ray.

We don't do the trade unless they indicate that they will buy
Ray out. That's why we would be willing to take two expiring rent-a-vets to spark us this year in AH and Nate and agree to eat Jeffries contract. In retrospect, maybe they should give us a pick instead of the other way around, or we tell them to keep Nate and AH and that we want Chandler for eating JJ's contract.

They will not indicate that they will buy Ray out because that is a violation of league rules. You can't negotiate that.

Ray is not the kind of player you buy out. He is a good team guy who can still play at a very high level. The Knicks also have no reason to buy anyone out this year whose contract expires. They have plenty of money to spend. They just don't want to have any obligations when Lebron is on the market.

While a team indicating that they will buy a player out as part of an agreement does not comport with league rules, from a pragmatic viewpoint, this happens all the time in circumvention of the rules. (See Lindsay Hunter, Cavs plan for Z, etc. etc.).