Trade Lee and Nate

[dave2138]

Can someone explain the sign and trade rule to me. Whats the catch? Why wouldn't every team resign a free agent and then trade him to the team that wants to acquire him?

When we talk about Lebron James/Dwayne Wade.. Say 1 of them decides to choose NY over Cleveland/Miami..why can't Cleveland decide to resign James to max contract then trade him to us for like 5 future 1st round picks, Gallinari, Chandler etc.

 

[dave2138]

1 more question - On Hoopshype, it says Robinson and Lee both have qualifying offers for the 09/10 season. What exactly does this mean? Is there another possibility besides
signing long term deals / signing elsewhere / sign and trade?

 

[Crazy⑧s]

N8's made some noise since the ASG & that's great news for both him individually and for the team.

Thats just it!! Nate did'nt start putting up those kind of numbers until after the All star game which I applaud him for.The problem that I have with this thow is alot of posters on here talking up Nate game like he has done that his whole career which is not true.I like Nate and I would like to see him stay but if I had to choose between Lee and Nate then its a land slide to keep Lee b/c he is worth so much more for the Knicks.Everybody talks about Lees defense being bad and yes I agree it isn't that good.

What has Lee done every offseason?? He works hard on improving his game!! One offseason he worked hard on his foul shots and when the season started the next year he was shooting 80%.Well the next offseason they told him he has to improve his jumper well he worked his ass off and done nothing but shoot jumpers and this season he greatly improved.This offseason he will work hard on his defense b/c he knows he has to and I garrentee his defense will be better b/c he works hard and he wants to win.

Again I want to keep both but if I had to trade one then Nate has to go b/c Lee brings much more to the table each and every game.Some of you always talks about Lees defense not being as good as it should be which is true but I hardly ever hear anything about Nates bad shot selection,bad defense,him losing his cool out on the court,arguing with the coach,trying to fight with the other teams players like he did again last night.


Nate is kind of a hot head sometimes and that isn't good for the Knicks team in general.Lee is nothing like that b/c he brings more to the Knicks team thats a fact. Thats why if I had to trade one then it has to be Nate and resign Lee.Now I know alot won't agree with what I wrote and I repect your opinion I just hope you can respect mine.

I'd prefer to keep Lee as well dude. Sadly, we'll be trading big for big. Considering the drought of quality bigs in the NBA and our dire need for an inside presence on D we can't afford to lose Lee and must pursue a sign & trade.

We're currently stacked in positions 1 through 3 and we'll have to "spend money to make money" so to speak. I just really hope that it's a worthwhile move if we do end up losing Lee. Hence the Bosh for Lee & Harrington trade.

Bosh's D isn't awesome, but it's better than Lee's & boards will become available in Lee's absence for Chandler & Wilcox or a yet to be signed new addition for the upcoming season.

And you're right. Nate has never really played great ball until late. He's had big numbers, but they've been mired in a lack of consistency. Love to see him keep scoring playing well. Some D would be nice as well.

 

[bfab99]

new here.

Man, i want us to keep both Lee and Nate. Hopefully Donnie Walsh finds a way to make it happen.

 

[Arod2k9]

Can someone explain the sign and trade rule to me. Whats the catch? Why wouldn't every team resign a free agent and then trade him to the team that wants to acquire him?

When we talk about Lebron James/Dwayne Wade.. Say 1 of them decides to choose NY over Cleveland/Miami..why can't Cleveland decide to resign James to max contract then trade him to us for like 5 future 1st round picks, Gallinari, Chandler etc.

A sign-and-trade agreement is a type of contract allowed in the NBAcollective bargaining agreement, wherein one team signs a player to a contract and trades him to another team. This is typically done to allow the eventual acquiring team to obtain a free agent player at a higher salary and/or a greater number of years than would ordinarily be permitted under the NBA salary cap.
The sign-and-trade helps teams to capitalize on assets that they are going to lose if they are unable to trade the player. Imagine a player, Mr X, who is planning on pursuing free agency in the coming off-season. His current team TeamA knows that at least one of the other teams will sign him. If this happens TeamA will have gotten nothing out of Mr X other than his past accomplishments. However, because TeamA is Mr X's current contract holder TeamA can offer Mr X more money per year than any other team and can sign Mr X to a longer contract. It is therefore in the economic interest of Mr X to be signed by TeamA to the more lucrative contract and be traded instead of going to free agency. It is also in the best interests of TeamA because TeamA will then get something in return for Mr X such as some draftpicks or maybe some equally good players. If they had let Mr X go to free agency they would have gotten nothing.
Sign-and-trades are considered "atomic" transactions under league rules; if the acquiring team rescinds the trade for some reason (such as a failed physical examination), then the contract signed with the initial team is also voided. In this way, such an occurrence does not result in the initial team being stuck with a player they do not want, or under terms they might find unacceptable; the player is also protected from ending up under contract with a team he may no longer wish to play for. Such an event happened in 2005, when Shareef Abdur-Rahim was acquired by the New Jersey Nets in a sign-and-trade with the Portland Trail Blazers; the trade was subsequently cancelled by the Nets when a physical exam discovered scar tissue in Abdur-Rahim's knee. As a result of the cancellation, Abdur-Rahim once again became a free agent; his contract with Portland (who had his Bird rights) was voided.

 

[Oldtimer]

Qualifying Offers and Free Agency

I took a look at the CBA and this is what I got out of it.

A Qualifying Offer is limited to veterans who were first round picks and is an amount for the qualifying years determined by a formula. The team must make a Qualifying Offer during the Qualifying Offer period or the player becomes an unrestricted free agent. If the Qualifying Offer is made in a timely manner, then the player is a restricted free agent, i.e., the team will have a right of first refusal, it can match another team's offer.

I do not believe that Lee or Nate are technically restricted free agents yet, but the Knicks will have to make a Qualifying Offer to each before June 30th in order to make them restricted free agents as opposed to unrestricted free agents. I know the media has referred to them as restricted free agents but I believe the media s assuming the necessary Qualifying Offers. But I might well be wrong. In any event, it is clear that Lee and Nate will be restricted free agents after June 30th. The Knicks will not let them become unrestricted free agents.

The Knicks can offer a better contract to Lee or Nate than any other team, but are not likely to give either of them anything more than another team's offer.

If the Knicks sign either, then he can be traded. The team that made the best offer might still be interested and will give something back for the player and his contract -- presumably.

 

[KING~POETIQ]

i'm hearing hatred towards nate on many threads. he's the only one that excites and brings way more positives than david "couldn't even guard cripples" Lee. chandler, harrington, wilcox and jeffries would easily pick up the slack on rebounding if lee were traded.

 

[WVKnickfan]

i'm hearing hatred towards nate on many threads. he's the only one that excites and brings way more positives than david "couldn't even guard cripples" Lee. chandler, harrington, wilcox and jeffries would easily pick up the slack on rebounding if lee were traded.

It looks like the only one on here with hatred in them is you.You talk about Lee like he has done nothing all season long.He has played his ass off all season long and you know he has so give the man credit.I like Nate alot b/c he does bring excitment to the game but if you are saying Lee does'nt bring that same excitment,heart and hustle everynight then sorry but I strongly dissagree with you.

 

[Knicker23]

everyone on our team right now should be/can be traded if we can get a deal. gallo chandler lee robinson...i wouldn't mind keepin gallo, and chandler...but but nate and lee should be traded if we can get a good deal... i don't care how 'ny' they are, we need results and as much as the hustle, they dont do it good enough

 

[Crazy⑧s]

everyone on our team right now should be/can be traded if we can get a deal. gallo chandler lee robinson...i wouldn't mind keepin gallo, and chandler...but but nate and lee should be traded if we can get a good deal... i don't care how 'ny' they are, we need results and as much as the hustle, they dont do it good enough

Co-sign there dude.

If the future is the main goal, then I wouldn't be sad to see anyone go if it'll benefit the Knicks. It'd be exciting too. A fresh start from all the crud left behind by Thomas & Layden's retarded rule. I wouldn't complain at all as long as it's done competently & cleanly.

 

[quiggle]

Chandler missed what could have been the game winning shot, you like seeing more of this here or on another team?

 

[KING~POETIQ]

It looks like the only one on here with hatred in them is you.You talk about Lee like he has done nothing all season long.He has played his ass off all season long and you know he has so give the man credit.I like Nate alot b/c he does bring excitment to the game but if you are saying Lee does'nt bring that same excitment,heart and hustle everynight then sorry but I strongly dissagree with you.

lee brings excitement?!?!?!?!?!?:teeth::teeth::teeth::teeth::teeth:

his hustle is non-existent once he crosses half court to play defense.

i actually did give credit to lee in the beginning of the season when he was playing pretty good. but the one thing he hasn't done well all season is play defense. so now that he's playing garbage all around, its clear to see that his career is over.

you gotta open your eyes. lee played good in the beginning, and half way thru the season his play waned off. unlike nate, who has improved throughout the season. playing much better in the second half of this year.

lee shows that he won't improve much from here on in. he has peaked. on the other hand, sky's the limit for nate.

David got lucky that we won't make the playoffs this year, otherwise he would of been in a wheelchair by the end of the first round.

 

[TunerAddict]

Whats worse, a guy that can play good defense but won't because he is lazy, or a guy that can't play D but at least tries every play?

 

[KING~POETIQ]

good try tuner. maybe your question will work next time... :lol:

 

[Akamu]

Every-time David Lee "tries" to play defense a baby dies. Plus he can't create his own shot, yes he does once in a blue moon but face it he can't. Pick n roll at table six, thanks.

I still favor Nate, if there is any player that comes close to looking like a star on the team it's Mr. 5'9.

 

[JayJ44]

Nate>>>>Lee, IMO.

Lee is a role player. He gets garbage buckets, rebounds, hustles, etc. He's a a pretty good rebounder, but his stats are inflated since there are no other rebounders, or post presences on this team. He can't make a jumper to save his life. He worked hard on it, but he just doesn't have the ability to be a jumpshooter. Problem is, he's a huge liability on defense. Most of the time, he doesn't even try. Sometimes, rather than fouling someone when they have an easy lay up, he just puts his hands up, so he doesn't have to leave the game.

Nate has his problems too. Bad defense, little out of control sometimes. But he's shown the ability to take over games. He's a great offensive player, with his speed, athleticism, and shooting touch, he's very hard to guard. When he's your teams main scoring option, you'll have a problem. But when we get a better team, and Nate comes off the bench, he'll be a very potent weapon. Besides, his defense can improve. He has the ability, he just needs to show effort, and get experience, on the defensive end of the floor. Who knows if it will, but at least it's a possibility. Unlike Lee, where he's hit his ceiling.

Both these guys are expendable, if need be. But I would rather keep Nate. He'll probably be cheaper, and I think he brings more to the table.

 

[WVKnickfan]

lee brings excitement?!?!?!?!?!?:teeth::teeth::teeth::teeth::teeth:

his hustle is non-existent once he crosses half court to play defense.

i actually did give credit to lee in the beginning of the season when he was playing pretty good. but the one thing he hasn't done well all season is play defense. so now that he's playing garbage all around, its clear to see that his career is over.

you gotta open your eyes. lee played good in the beginning, and half way thru the season his play waned off. unlike nate, who has improved throughout the season. playing much better in the second half of this year.

lee shows that he won't improve much from here on in. he has peaked. on the other hand, sky's the limit for nate.

David got lucky that we won't make the playoffs this year, otherwise he would of been in a wheelchair by the end of the first round.

LMAO,talk about playing defense who was that rookie that ate Nate alive during that Clipper game :teeth::teeth::teeth::teeth:.Thats enought right there to show you how good of a defender Nate is.Nate did'nt start putting up those kind of numbers until after the All star game which I applaud him for.The problem that I have with this thow is alot of posters(like you) on here talking up Nate game like he has done that his whole career which is not true.I like Nate and I would like to see him stay but if I had to choose between Lee and Nate then its a land slide to keep Lee b/c he is worth so much more for the Knicks.Everybody talks about Lees defense being bad and yes I agree it isn't that good but he imo still brings more to the table than Nate.

 

[KING~POETIQ]

LMAO,talk about playing defense who was that rookie that ate Nate alive during that Clipper game :teeth::teeth::teeth::teeth:.Thats enought right there to show you how good of a defender Nate is.Nate did'nt start putting up those kind of numbers until after the All star game which I applaud him for.The problem that I have with this thow is alot of posters(like you) on here talking up Nate game like he has done that his whole career which is not true.I like Nate and I would like to see him stay but if I had to choose between Lee and Nate then its a land slide to keep Lee b/c he is worth so much more for the Knicks.Everybody talks about Lees defense being bad and yes I agree it isn't that good but he imo still brings more to the table than Nate.

are you aware that nate only played 18 minutes?!? guess not. check the stats:


<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=yspsctbg><TD class=ysptblhdr colSpan=8 height=18>New York </TD><TD class=ysptblhdr align=right colSpan=8 height=18></TD></TR><TR class="ysptblthbody1 yspboxscore-columnheader-row" align=right><TD class="yspdetailttl player" align=left width="17%" height=18> Starters </TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="4%"></TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="7%">Min</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="7%">FG</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">3Pt</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">FT</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">+/-</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Off</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Reb</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Ast</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">TO</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Stl</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">BS</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">BA</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">PF</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="7%">Pts </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD class=player align=left> C. Duhon </TD><TD class=player>G </TD><TD>42:37</TD><TD>4-10</TD><TD>1-4</TD><TD>1-1</TD><TD>+3 </TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>10</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>10 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD class=player align=left> Q. Richardson </TD><TD class=player>G </TD><TD>23:18</TD><TD>4-7</TD><TD>1-3</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>+7 </TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>9 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD class=player align=left> D. Lee </TD><TD class=player>C </TD><TD>35:34</TD><TD>7-7</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>4-5</TD><TD>+3 </TD><TD>3</TD><TD>13</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>18 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD class=player align=left> W. Chandler </TD><TD class=player>F </TD><TD>41:36</TD><TD>10-20</TD><TD>2-4</TD><TD>0-1</TD><TD>-6 </TD><TD>1</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>22 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD class=player align=left> A. Harrington </TD><TD class=player>F </TD><TD>41:15</TD><TD>13-21</TD><TD>4-8</TD><TD>8-9</TD><TD>+4 </TD><TD>1</TD><TD>7</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>38 </TD></TR><TR class="ysptblthbody1 yspboxscore-columnheader-row" align=right><TD class="yspdetailttl player" align=left width="17%" height=18> Bench </TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="4%"></TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="7%">Min</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="7%">FG</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">3Pt</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">FT</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">+/-</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Off</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Reb</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Ast</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">TO</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">Stl</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">BS</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">BA</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="5%">PF</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="7%">Pts </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD class=player align=left> L. Hughes </TD><TD class=player></TD><TD>28:52</TD><TD>4-10</TD><TD>3-7</TD><TD>2-2</TD><TD>-12 </TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>13 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD class=player align=left> J. Jeffries </TD><TD class=player></TD><TD>22:57</TD><TD>3-7</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>4-4</TD><TD>-11 </TD><TD>3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>10 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD class=player align=left> N. Robinson</TD><TD class=player></TD><TD>17:56</TD><TD>6-8</TD><TD>1-3</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>-7 </TD><TD>1</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>13 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD class=player align=left> C. Wilcox </TD><TD class=player></TD><TD>10:53</TD><TD>0-2</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>2-2</TD><TD>-6 </TD><TD>1</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD class=player align=left> E. Curry </TD><TD class=player></TD><TD class=dnp align=middle colSpan=14>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD class=player align=left> D. Nichols </TD><TD class=player></TD><TD class=dnp align=middle colSpan=14>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD class=player align=left> C. Sims </TD><TD class=player></TD><TD class=dnp align=middle colSpan=14>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysptblbdr3><TD colSpan=16 height=1></TD></TR><TR class=ysptblclbg5 align=right><TD class=sum align=left height=18> Totals</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>51-92</TD><TD>12-29</TD><TD>21-24</TD><TD></TD><TD>10</TD><TD>36</TD><TD>27</TD><TD>18</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>19</TD><TD>135 </TD></TR><TR align=right><TD class=sum align=left height=18> Percentages:</TD><TD colSpan=2> </TD><TD>.554</TD><TD>.414</TD><TD>.875</TD><TD> </TD><TD class=team-rebounds align=left colSpan=9>Team Rebounds: 4

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


so you see, it was that other bum ass bitch (duhon) who let the clippers' two rookies, gordon and taylor, score 19 and 35, respectively. yet you decide to put all the blame on nate the great even without knowing the facts. SMH

yes nate has been playing much better after the half way point, but isn't that what you would expect out of your young talent? to improve and progress? but you don't see it that way. you prefer a guy that plays good in the beginning of the season(with no defense) and progressively gets worser overall. not to mention, how his athleticism will be non-existent by next year.


DAVID LEE = CHRIS DUDLEY


face it, he's done. its time to change that david lee pic thats in your sig :lol:

the only thing that Lee brings is trade value. it would be wise for the knicks to trade lee at season's end for a defensive big man.

i'm going to be watchin' tonights game with much scrutiny. specially david lee's defense (n/h). hope your boy shuts down the opposition, wvknickfan. if not then expect a LEE APPRECIATION THREAD by me :lol:

 

[CLYDE]

The knocks on Lee & Nate are correct, but you must keep things in focus.

Lee - for the 30 th. pick in draft is a very productive player, he is not LeBron, but only 1 LeBron. Walsh missed when he had a chance to sign Lee last year at about 4 mm per. Now some GM from the Suns, Celts, Jazz, or T. Blazers will offer him a ton of $ as a white guy who can play quite well. Walsh won't be able to match, so Lee may be gone for nothing in return. Too bad. But Lee is not worth 10 mm per.

Nate - Again a real find late in the draft, at 4 - 5 mm per he is worth keeping.

Bottom line IMHO:

1. Walsh, D'Toni, new system, trades, some new players, and the result may be less wins that I.T. produced.

2. Gallo I like because he seems the only one who looks like he wants to throw a chair at somebody when they lose. If he gets healthy I can see him looking LeBron in the eye and going at him with an attitude & trash talking.

3. In the draft or D-League just look for a hungry guy, i.e. Starks, probably can find a killer attitude guy for little money. A shot blocker...please.

4. Winning teams in the NBA play D, execute in crunch time, and have at least 1 player that looks someone in the eyes and says "No, not in my house" and backs it up. i.e., Wade.

My posting name is Clyde, and I loved years ago when Clyde was asked his favorite place to play, said something like, "Boston, I love hostile people screaming at me, intense pressure, I just love to shut those people up".

 

[KBlack25]

If we have to keep one, I'd say it has to be David Lee. I simply don't trust Nate Robinson to be a full time PG. He dribbles too wildly, he's not a good enough passer, and he makes truly fundamental mistakes while handling the ball. What happens in 3 years when Nate is half a step slower, when Nate jumps an inch lower than he used to?

I'm not saying Lee is phenomenal but the way I see it a championship team needs a guy like David Lee. He'll get down and dirty in the key, he'll rebound well (as he's done all year) and clean up the superstar's mess. I don't see Nate Robinson being a starter, much less a starting point guard, on a championship contender. He just doesn't have the proper skill set to be a great PG, and he's way too small to play the 2. The way I look at it is look at the 1998 Yankees. They didn't have guys that would hit monstrous home runs every at bat, they had a bunch of guys that did enough, did the dirty work, got that key hit, made that key play. I'm not saying Lee should be a starting center, but on a team where there's a superstar swingman and a decent to pretty good 7-foot center (edit: accidentally wrote 8 foot, didn't mean that big), Lee can be that power forward who cleans the glass night in and night out. I feel like guys that can do what Nate can do are a dime a dozen. Sure, athletically Nate is extremely gifted, but athleticism, especially the brand of athleticism Nate has, fades a lot more quickly than a guy's work ethic to go get the rebound. I just can't picture Nate as the PG on a team that wins the title. I can picture David Lee as the big time rebounder on a team that does though.