PDA

View Full Version : Zach for Jermaine O'Neal?



knicklover
Feb 08, 2008, 11:44
What do people think of this rumor?

I don't know the details of O'Neal's contract. If it's a lot shorter, it might make some sense because we could dump him sooner and free up contract space to get some younger guys and prospects. But if it's a similar contract, I see no reason to get older and bring in a guy that's constantly injured.

Kiyaman
Feb 08, 2008, 12:04
What do people think of this rumor?

I don't know the details of O'Neal's contract. If it's a lot shorter, it might make some sense because we could dump him sooner and free up contract space to get some younger guys and prospects. But if it's a similar contract, I see no reason to get older and bring in a guy that's constantly injured.


This is not any rumor other than from your mind.
Larry Bird & Isiah Thomas make a deal?
Only in the next life time.

knicklover
Feb 08, 2008, 12:18
This is not any rumor other than from your mind.
Larry Bird & Isiah Thomas make a deal?
Only in the next life time.

There are several articles confirming that the Pacers are in talks with several teams about O'Neal, Isiah is said to love O'Neal, O'Neal is said to be willing to come to NY, and at least one NY player said that he thought O'Neal would be a good fit. So it's not just in my mind.

GetRealistic
Feb 08, 2008, 12:32
I'm sick of all the Bird don't like Isiah so he won't make a trade nonsense. If Bird saw a trade that would benefit his team he'd make it. Not sure if this would help the Pacers out, but it'd deffinately help us out.

O'neil is a better defender and his contract expires in 2 years (same year as Marbury, James, and Malik)

stevie
Feb 08, 2008, 12:36
I Love It. Oneal Has A Year Left On His Contract And Zach Has 3. Oneal Also Get 6 Million More A Year Than Zach. If They Are Willing To Take Jefferies Off Our Hands Also. I Would Condsider Giving Them David Lee To Make This Deal Work.

After Next Season We Would Lose Another 20 Million In Salary..

hometheaterguy
Feb 08, 2008, 12:50
This is not any rumor other than from your mind.
Larry Bird & Isiah Thomas make a deal?
Only in the next life time.

It is a fact that the Knicks and Indiana have communicated on O'Neil. I think Indiana is in a pinch because O'Neil is one of the top paid players in the game! Bird has tried to work out deals with other teams like NJ, Miami etc... They fell through because these teams have good GM's that won't over pay for a player like a certain GM we all know and love! So to say that this is only in someone's mind is ridiculous. Think about it, why wouldn't he want to engage the Knicks? NY is desperate, Isiah is very desperate so Bird probably knows that if any team will give up way too much for O'Neil it would be the Knicks. Since O'Neil makes the kind of money he does, Indiana knows that they will have to take back a large contract just to meet the requirement. So Randolph could be that player and it wouldn't surprise me if you saw Isiah Part with Randolph, Balkman, Chandler and why not throw in a couple of unprotected #1 dratf picks over the next few years as well. Now that is an Isiah trade and Indiana would jump all over it if offered!!! Then all of us here at Knicksonline can start posting in the Jermain O'Neil sucks thread that would eventually pop up on this site when the Knicks record doesn't improve.

New New York
Feb 08, 2008, 16:22
Well JO has one less year on his contract than Zach. So that is a plus. He can defend, another plus. But Indy would probably want Lee, Balk, or Nate, that would be the deal breaker to me. But Jermaine Oneal has been on winning teams. Jermaine is more of an team player than Zach. And Jermaine is a leader. With all that said, this is probably why Bird will want some picks or an actual good player. This is probably just a rumor anyways

New New York
Feb 08, 2008, 16:24
Maybe Isiah can give them Malik for Tinsley in the deal as well? But then we would have Isiah team that made the playoffs, and that would be reason enough for Dolan to not fire Isiah this summer! Like I said before, we are in a Lose, Lose situation this year however you look at it

New New York
Feb 08, 2008, 16:28
O yeah I forgot to mention that Bird hates Isiah, so this makes the possibility less likely!

metrocard
Feb 08, 2008, 20:07
Well JO has one less year on his contract than Zach. So that is a plus. He can defend, another plus. But Indy would probably want Lee, Balk, or Nate, that would be the deal breaker to me. But Jermaine Oneal has been on winning teams. Jermaine is more of an team player than Zach. And Jermaine is a leader. With all that said, this is probably why Bird will want some picks or an actual good player. This is probably just a rumor anyways

JO has one less year than Zach? Damn, I never knew that. Good post. I guess I'm kinda in favor of this deal, as long as we trade Crawford and Curry after.

NYKnicks15
Feb 08, 2008, 20:40
this is FAR from just a rumor. in fact look for something significant to come out within the next week. not saying the trade WILL infact go down within the week but it is a great possibility. there a few trades that seem to be lingering around the knicks (artest, oneal and wallace) and to be completely 100 percent honest with you all three seem very possible to happen before deadline.

i am in favor of this trade though. and big ups to getrealistic to pointing out one of my HUGE pet peeves. these are businessmen and Larry Bird and Isiah will get this trade done if they both know they will benefit. The trade will probably involve Zach Randolph and Malik Rose along with Renaldo Balkman going to Indy for Jermaine and maybe a less player think Rush or one of their SG.

this would cross out the deal for Walalce that would have malik q an jones going to Chi. unless they can somehow slip in one of the JJs in the Oneal deal.

Jermaine has 1 year less than Zach and will at that point take 20 mill off the books for us. back to back years with 20 mill coming off the books. As a player and not just a contract Jermaine is a big man who defends, plays team ball and is a LEADER. somehting we lack in all 3 of those categories.

abcd
Feb 08, 2008, 22:45
I wouldn't mind the trade. However, I think Isiah should also trade Curry and Crawford, if he decides to trade Randolph. I still think the Knicks should keep Randolph, cause he's one of the few guys on the team that isn't 1 dimensional, but if Isiah trades Randolph and then trades Crawford and Curry, it would be a good move.We should've made an offer for Gasol or Artest, but now we will have to settle for O' Neal, who most likely won't play for the Knicks cause A) he's injured B) the Knicks suck C)he's injured and D) you're not allowed to trade an injured player, unless they pass a physical.

New New York
Feb 08, 2008, 23:29
I'm sick of all the Bird don't like Isiah so he won't make a trade nonsense. If Bird saw a trade that would benefit his team he'd make it. Not sure if this would help the Pacers out, but it'd deffinately help us out.

O'neil is a better defender and his contract expires in 2 years (same year as Marbury, James, and Malik)

I hear you Bro! But you have to take that into consideration sometimes. You're right Bird will take any deal that would better his franchise, but he would certainly demand more from Isiah. But Paxon and Isiah aren't the best of freinds, and they seem to be in talks every season. I mean Bird wouldve considered sending Artest to NY for Frye (which in hindsight wouldve been a sweet deal), so they would work together, but Bird would rather trade Jermaine elsewhere.

But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I mean Jermaine wants to be a Knick, Zach would embrace being a Pacer. I mean if Zach can go to a team where he is the low post focal point, then he can put up 20 and 10 easily. Now neither team becomes The Celtics or The Lakers with this possible move, other players need to be added to make these teams winners.

Would Isiah go after Ron after that move? Like I said before, I'd like to see Tinsley a Knick, is he apart of the trade? Would this trade prolonge Isiah getting fired? I'd see if Sac would take Curry in a deal for Ron if we were to land Oneil'. Maybe play Oneil at center, Lee at PF, and Ron at SF. Ok so I'm once again gettin way ahead, but this could atleast provide some ray of hope for us.....or just another bad trade, is it worth the risk?

metrocard
Feb 09, 2008, 00:30
Tinsley is terrible.

Eddy Currys House Special
Feb 09, 2008, 03:50
As much as I want to get shorter contracts and get Jeffries the hell outta here you gotta wonder about a guy that is as in love with Isiah as O'Neal is. I can't take having Eddy Curry on this team anymore. More then Crawford, Marbury, Isiah, Dolan etc he has got to get out of New York.

New New York
Feb 09, 2008, 07:14
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=165~3179~1017~615~1024&teams=11~11~11~18~18&te=&cash=

A scenerio that could work. Metro I know you don't like Tinsley, but consider this...He's a team player, he's played in the East Finals so he has won in this league, and doesnt need to score. Plus, the deal would move your favorite All Time favorite Knick Jamal Crawford :thumbsup:

pat
Feb 09, 2008, 07:26
I Love It. Oneal Has A Year Left On His Contract And Zach Has 3. Oneal Also Get 6 Million More A Year Than Zach. If They Are Willing To Take Jefferies Off Our Hands Also. I Would Condsider Giving Them David Lee To Make This Deal Work.

After Next Season We Would Lose Another 20 Million In Salary..

This would even be better if we could put Marbury on top for some garbage but I guess it's impossible because of Marbury's injury.

pat
Feb 09, 2008, 07:34
As much as I want to get shorter contracts and get Jeffries the hell outta here you gotta wonder about a guy that is as in love with Isiah as O'Neal is. I can't take having Eddy Curry on this team anymore. More then Crawford, Marbury, Isiah, Dolan etc he has got to get out of New York.

Jeffries numbers aren't good and he has a huge contract but did you have a look at the +/- column in line of the box scores? I don't like him but I wouldn't trade him. He is a Bruce Bowen kind of player. Apart from the fact that he is too expensive, signing him probably was Isiah's best -- I know it sounds strange -- move.

New New York
Feb 09, 2008, 07:45
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=25~2755~2986~2782~739&teams=18~18~23~23~23&te=&cash=

Ok so now accompany this move with the one from above. I'd hate to see Balkman go, but you'd get Garcia who doesn't bring the same intesity level as Balkman, but plays good D, and can put the ball in the hoop. Plus like Tinsley he's from New York, and for some reason that means a lot to me. So lets put my two trades on paper

Tinsley
Q
Artest
JO
Eddy (not easy to move in any sense of the phrase)
Lee
Garcia
Chandler
Collins

This now better resembles an actual NBA team. Players who can play on both sides of the ball. A PG who can run an offense, leadership from Oneil, and players who can contribute off the bench. Now Eddy is still the starting Center, but like him or not he is a good decoy on offense. I'd like to see what Isiah could do as coach of this team, and if it doesnt work, I think there are coaches who would embrace this team, Namely JVG!

Now both of these trades are realistic, but is Isiah commited to winning not to players like he says, because the question is if he can see himself letting go of Jamal Crawford which is the only thing that keeps that trade from happening on the Knicks side. Also I know Bird likes Dunlevy, would he want to bring in Crawford? But you gotta admit that I am on to something....or just maybe on something!

paris401
Feb 09, 2008, 08:08
Jeffries numbers aren't good and he has a huge contract but did you have a look at the +/- column in line of the box scores? I don't like him but I wouldn't trade him. He is a Bruce Bowen kind of player. Apart from the fact that he is too expensive, signing him probably was Isiah's best -- I know it sounds strange -- move.


jefferies blows... he has no "O" game, and i don't think he is that great on "D" either...

i guess when u look at all the moves IT has made, maybe jefferies is the best... i can't believe i am saying that...

Kiyaman
Feb 09, 2008, 10:44
There are several articles confirming that the Pacers are in talks with several teams about O'Neal, Isiah is said to love O'Neal, O'Neal is said to be willing to come to NY, and at least one NY player said that he thought O'Neal would be a good fit. So it's not just in my mind.


No insult to you Knicklover, I wrote the same thing in other Knick Forums and Indiana Forums that Posted this rumor.

Larry Bird knew a year after signing Jermain O'Neal (and Firing Isiah) that O'Neal was poison for the Indiana Lockerroom. Bird tried to work it out with O'Neal by stretching his neck out for just one player after the Detroit Brawl which was J.O'Neal. He even shopped and traded Ron Artest for peremeter shooting Peja to help J.O'Neal. And when that didn't help but make things more unpleasent in the Indiana Lockerroom Bird had to trade Steve Jackson whom was tired of the Indiana organization Pampering to J.O'Neal.
All of this CRAZYNESS in the Indiana organization was done because of the FIRING of Isiah Thomas, and Jermain O'Neal LUV for Isiah & Aquire.
Dolan maybe slow in knowledge of the NBA, but he know that putting J.Oneal in a Knick uniform means keeping Isiah Thomas as a Head Coach & G.M. for another Spoil Brat NBA player J.O'Neal (Marbury).
Plus the most important thing is Larry Bird would RAPE the 14-36 Isiah Thomas Knicks Organization so bad that you would have to FIRE Isiah Thomas within a week of that trade. And No Isiah means Jermain O'Neal is worthless.
Now do you get the point.

Ron Artest could make the Knicks a Better Team with either BUM Bigman still on it Curry or Zach. J.O'Neal is another Isiah selfish player on offense but he does play defense when he is not injured.

jzero29
Feb 09, 2008, 14:04
I wouldn't mind the trade. However, I think Isiah should also trade Curry and Crawford, if he decides to trade Randolph. I still think the Knicks should keep Randolph, cause he's one of the few guys on the team that isn't 1 dimensional, but if Isiah trades Randolph and then trades Crawford and Curry, it would be a good move.We should've made an offer for Gasol or Artest, but now we will have to settle for O' Neal, who most likely won't play for the Knicks cause A) he's injured B) the Knicks suck C)he's injured and D) you're not allowed to trade an injured player, unless they pass a physical.
Randolph is not exactly multidimensional either. He's more than most of the knicks but he's not that great. He can't or won't pass, he can't dribble. He has nice midrange jumper and good post up moves, He rebounds but dooesn't play good D.

donchris
Feb 09, 2008, 16:02
With respect to every one's opinion, just because you don't like a player doesn't mean that the player doesn't have value. Oneal has been trying to get out of Indy for two years. I think Randolph is a good player and if we get Wallace I could see us keeping Randolph but Oneal is a leader and Randolph is not. Plus Randolph reportedly wants out. If Oneal is to be traded, naturally Indy will want as much as they can get in return. And it's true that Indy had talks with NJ and L.A. but nothing happened. In Randolph Indy trades a 20/10 guy for a 20/10 guy and a few small pieces. Not a bad trade for ether team. I hope all three trades go through. We still need a PG.

Side note: David Lee is expendable. He's a role player! Role Player! Role Player!

Wallace
Oneal
Artest
Crawford
?

metrocard
Feb 09, 2008, 18:35
With respect to every one's opinion, just because you don't like a player doesn't mean that the player doesn't have value. Oneal has been trying to get out of Indy for two years. I think Randolph is a good player and if we get Wallace I could see us keeping Randolph but Oneal is a leader and Randolph is not. Plus Randolph reportedly wants out. If Oneal is to be traded, naturally Indy will want as much as they can get in return. And it's true that Indy had talks with NJ and L.A. but nothing happened. In Randolph Indy trades a 20/10 guy for a 20/10 guy and a few small pieces. Not a bad trade for ether team. I hope all three trades go through. We still need a PG.

Side note: David Lee is expendable. He's a role player! Role Player! Role Player!

Wallace
Oneal
Artest
Crawford
?

Damn, you will never learn. Once an Isiahsexual, always an Isiahexual. I've thought you've finally seen the light and understand how and why we got to where we were. Now it just seems you're blinded by Isiah's semen and feces to understand that a stradegy of having two aging over paid no longer all star big men will only continue to keep us on this trend that we're use to. We'll get slightly better, but we'll never to get to where we SHOULD be, an if you can't understand where we SHOULD be and were we SHOULD of been 3 years ago; then give up being a Knick fan and apply for an position as Isiah's sock puppet.

donchris
Feb 09, 2008, 19:14
Damn, you will never learn. Once an Isiahsexual, always an Isiahexual. I've thought you've finally seen the light and understand how and why we got to where we were. Now it just seems you're blinded by Isiah's semen and feces to understand that a stradegy of having two aging over paid no longer all star big men will only continue to keep us on this trend that we're use to. We'll get slightly better, but we'll never to get to where we SHOULD be, an if you can't understand where we SHOULD be and were we SHOULD of been 3 years ago; then give up being a Knick fan and apply for an position as Isiah's sock puppet.

You need to see a shrink. Why do you feel the need to throw Isiah in every situation? Thomas must have pounded you with out the lube. Why are you so angry? Thomas should be and will be fired at the end of the season. What's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

One of the major criticisms of Zach Randolph is he doesn't pass out of double teams and his defense is missing in action. Oneal has a shorter contract then Randolph and is a much better defender. Isn't the Knicks problem defense? Didn't you say numerous times that Isiah doesn't understand this? May be you don't understand this. Oneal is a defending big man and a team player. Those are things that you have admitted we are lacking. What part of this are you not getting? Oneal has a shorter contract then Randolph. We save 17 mil with this trade. How is it not a win win?

knicklover
Feb 09, 2008, 19:34
You need to see a shrink. Why do you feel the need to throw Isiah in every situation? Thomas must have pounded you with out the lube. Why are you so angry? Thomas should be and will be fired at the end of the season. What's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

One of the major criticisms of Zach Randolph is he doesn't pass out of double teams and his defense is missing in action. Oneal has a shorter contract then Randolph and is a much better defender. Isn't the Knicks problem defense? Didn't you say numerous times that Isiah doesn't understand this? May be you don't understand this. Oneal is a defending big man and a team player. Those are things that you have admitted we are lacking. What part of this are you not getting? Oneal has a shorter contract then Randolph. We save 17 mil with this trade. How is it not a win win?

Don,

There are two ways of planning the future of the Knicks.

One way is to simply make any trade that improves the team. The upside of that is we will have a better team and may make the playoffs next year. The downside is that we are so far from a championship there is almost no way we can trade ourselves into a championship (like LA is trying to do now). All we will do is make it more difficult to get over the top because we won't get any top draft picks and we'll probably accumulate a lot of overpaid players that are past their peak.

Another way is to stink like we do now, let all the bad contracts expire, accumulate top draft picks, try to trade our bad contracts for shorter or expiring contracts, develop the handful of young players with potential we have etc.... The downside of this is that we might suck for awhile more. The upside is that if we draft well and have a lot of cap space we may be able to get a great player and develop the young ones to the point that in 3-4 years we will have a major contender for it all.

IMO, the latter path is superior, but it will require patience and sitting through a lot of losses.

donchris
Feb 09, 2008, 19:47
Don,

There are two ways of thinking about future of the Knicks.

One way is to simply make any trade that improves the team. The upside of that is we will have a better team and may make the playoffs next year. The downside is that we are so far from a championship there is almost no way to trade ourselves into a championship (like LA is trying to do now). All we will do is make it more difficult to get over the top because we won't get any top draft picks and we'll have a lot of players past their peak

Another way is to stink MSG out like we are doing now, let all the bad contracts expire, accumulate top draft picks, try to trade our bad contracts for shorter or expiring contracts, develop the handful of young players with potential we have etc.... The downside of this is that we might suck for awhile more. The upside is that if we draft well and have a lot of cap space we may be able to get a great player ande develop the yound ones to the point that in 3-4 years we will have a major contender for it all.

IMO, the latter path is superior, but it will require patience and sitting through a lot of losses.

I totally understand your point and I agree. My point is what is the difference between having several bad contract or trading several of them for a single bad contract? Does the trade make us any worse off? In fact we improve defensively. No doubt, we should make conservative trades but this is NY we're talking about. Money is no object here. Realistically we need to make a few minor tweaks to help us limp along until those contracts expire. Would you rather have the atrocious contract of Zach Randolph who does not help us defensively and isn't expiring anytime soon, Jarid Jeffries, Jerome James or have a pretty hefty contract of J. Oneal who is still productive? Can we at least agree that Oneal is probably going to be traded some where and he will make the team that he goes to better? Or do only contenders have good players? Since Wallace and Oneal are on poor teams does his now mean that they are poor over the hill players? I suppose then Oakafor is a wash.

metrocard
Feb 09, 2008, 20:40
You need to see a shrink. Why do you feel the need to throw Isiah in every situation? Thomas must have pounded you with out the lube. Why are you so angry? Thomas should be and will be fired at the end of the season. What's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

One of the major criticisms of Zach Randolph is he doesn't pass out of double teams and his defense is missing in action. Oneal has a shorter contract then Randolph and is a much better defender. Isn't the Knicks problem defense? Didn't you say numerous times that Isiah doesn't understand this? May be you don't understand this. Oneal is a defending big man and a team player. Those are things that you have admitted we are lacking. What part of this are you not getting? Oneal has a shorter contract then Randolph. We save 17 mil with this trade. How is it not a win win?

I understand that, but the best thing to do right now is not make trades like this. They're not necessary trades. We're in no position of winning right now. A team who's in position of winning could use a JO or a Ben Wallace.

We need to REBUILD, understand?

George M.
Feb 09, 2008, 23:29
I understand that, but the best thing to do right now is not make trades like this. They're not necessary trades. We're in no position of winning right now. A team who's in position of winning could use a JO or a Ben Wallace.

We need to REBUILD, understand?
Yes Metro you're absolutely right.Those are unnecessary trades.However,getting back to the myth of getting under the salary cap only 4 All-stars in the last 11 years have moved to teams under the cap.And 40 were moved in trades.Yep,that's right only 4 in the last 11yrs.So your position on getting under the cap is moot in my book.Getting a GM that other GM's wouldn't mind trading with would be a better solution.Someone that could actually move the bad contracts of Curry,Randolph,Crawford,Richardson and J.James for expiring contracts and draft picks.Now that would be something.The Atlanta Hawks have been 10-14 mill under the cap for the last 5 years.Where is there championship?? Are they a playoff contender? Hell No! The Sixers need a SG and an inside scorer and they're under the cap with a former Nets GM. Unfortunately those bums actually have a better chance.

donchris
Feb 10, 2008, 00:09
Yes Metro you're absolutely right.Those are unnecessary trades.However,getting back to the myth of getting under the salary cap only 4 All-stars in the last 11 years have moved to teams under the cap.And 40 were moved in trades.Yep,that's right only 4 in the last 11yrs.So your position on getting under the cap is moot in my book.Getting a GM that other GM's wouldn't mind trading with would be a better solution.Someone that could actually move the bad contracts of Curry,Randolph,Crawford,Richardson and J.James for expiring contracts and draft picks.Now that would be something.The Atlanta Hawks have been 10-14 mill under the cap for the last 5 years.Where is there championship?? Are they a playoff contender? Hell No! The Sixers need a SG and an inside scorer and they're under the cap with a former Nets GM. Unfortunately those bums actually have a better chance.

Teams improve by making trades and losing and hoping to get a good draft pick. I don't buy this stuff about GMs don't like Thomas. If we present a good trade proposal it has just as good of a chance to go through as any one else's. We don't need to rebuild and if we did who would we rebuild around? David Lee? Rebuilding means gutting the team. We don't need that. We need to make a few key moves, we need a pg and we need to break up the front court. We need to undo a lot of the stuff that Thomas did. But we still need to make improvements and not just give up and hope some magic happens in 2010. If we did that then we'd be the Hawks.

George M.
Feb 10, 2008, 00:54
Teams improve by making trades and losing and hoping to get a good draft pick. I don't buy this stuff about GMs don't like Thomas. If we present a good trade proposal it has just as good of a chance to go through as any one else's. We don't need to rebuild and if we did who would we rebuild around? David Lee? Rebuilding means gutting the team. We don't need that. We need to make a few key moves, we need a pg and we need to break up the front court. We need to undo a lot of the stuff that Thomas did. But we still need to make improvements and not just give up and hope some magic happens in 2010. If we did that then we'd be the Hawks.
Yes donchris you're right but the fact remains in my mind is if the Knicks don't make a move by the deadline Thomas is gone which I'm good with.It's the guy that replaces him I'm worried about.Dolan better make sure that it's not Vandeweghe cause he's not as sharp as some percieve him to be(Kenyon Martin and his gimpy knees at what 84 million)Yeah,a real sharp cookie that guy.I would only want someone credible and smart.