PDA

View Full Version : Another rumor on Lee



Pages : [1] 2

rollingstone
Jan 03, 2009, 15:56
Seems Nuggets were offering two first round draft picks + Chucky Atkins for D-Lee, but we wanted Kleiza instead of Chucky

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090103-04

Nuggets' picks would probably be low, but i sure wouldnt mind having a few of them, considering that we don't have so many in the future...

If they don't want to give Kleiza+picks, maybe we could ask Chucky+picks+they take Jeffries or Curry? Nuggets aren't going under cap till 2011 anyway, so it's not like Curry/Jeffries hurt their future

Toons
Jan 03, 2009, 17:59
Seems Nuggets were offering two first round draft picks + Chucky Atkins for D-Lee, but we wanted Kleiza instead of Chucky

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090103-04

Nuggets' picks would probably be low, but i sure wouldnt mind having a few of them, considering that we don't have so many in the future...

If they don't want to give Kleiza+picks, maybe we could ask Chucky+picks+they take Jeffries or Curry? Nuggets aren't going under cap till 2011 anyway, so it's not like Curry/Jeffries hurt their future

nah, with billups steering denver, they are looking to playoff births, their picks will never be lottery ....kleizas defense is good, hes a hard nosed white boy, but we already have lee who is still improving

horrible trade

GetRealistic
Jan 03, 2009, 18:20
Donnie has to really do his homework and see if he truly believes he can sign DLee to a resonable contract. Because if Lee wants big time money this trade sounds like an absolute great idea. If Lee who very well may get big money on the open market leaves after this season we beter get something of value for him.

Kleiza and two first round picks is something i think we cant turn down. We have no first round pick next season so adding a pick next season would be nice, also having two first round picks this season would help us have he flexibility to combine the picks and move up in the draft.

Also Denver's pick this season will not be a lottery but you never no what next seasons pick will be. If Carmelo or Billups have a serious injury Denver becomes an average team, and we may luck into a 2010 lottery pick.

Toons
Jan 03, 2009, 18:24
big money as in how much tho GR?

id give lee a 4 year 25 mil contract

Toons
Jan 03, 2009, 18:26
with the 2010 frenzy, lee may want to stay and be a part of rebrandin Knick bball

GetRealistic
Jan 03, 2009, 18:41
With his age and inflated stats due to this system i'd expect him to want much more then 4 years 25 million. I'd expect him to be seeking 8-9 million a year which may very well be to much for a power forward who plays absolutely no defense.

Two first round picks and a player of Klieza abilities is atleast worth thinkin about. If he wants to take a home town discount thats one thing, but if he wants to test the open market and get his money (which i wouldn't blame him for) we better get something in return and not just let him walk.

Easier ability to resign Nate
Klieza
09 first round pick
10 first round pick

for

David Lee

Atleast worth exploring

rollingstone
Jan 03, 2009, 19:32
i don't think we can get much more for Lee - dont forget that other teams are worried about his free agency too
Noone is going to throw high lottery picks at us!

2 picks in 20-26 range is a good value. There's been so many good players in that range over the years. Most of Spurs players are 20-30 picks. even Lee was pick 30 himself.

Besides, the market for picks is much higher than for rotation players waiting for big money. We can use those picks to sweeten any deal that includes Curry or Jeffries

If u read the link, report has it that D-Lee for Kleiza+picks was KNICKS offer, not Denver's. Denver thinks it's too much. Personally i dont care which player is included next to those picks, since Kleiza will want new deal this summer too.
If it's Chucky i dont mind, we need a guard. The key are the picks.
If it's Kleiza, great, he's had his best games as small ball PF. The market for that kind of player isn't huge, so we could probably resign him for 4-6 mil a year in summer.
But the key here are picks.

New New York
Jan 03, 2009, 20:05
This is similar to The Zach Randolph situation in that Donnie cant look too eager to move Lee, but in actuality he has to move either he or Nate. We currently have 23 million on The Books for 2010, now add atleast 10 million on to retain Lee and Nate and now we are at 33 million with only 27 to spend on FA's. So Donnie has to make one more move, now if Curry returns and looks good it looks like there is some interest in him in Charlotte, and I can see Memphis taking a look at him in a deal for Milic and another player.

I like the two picks in this proposal, but Chucky Atkins for David Lee leaves a gap at the PF position. I suppose Curry could come back and he and Al could be our new frontcourt. The two picks could be used in a trade package later on....I would only do this trade as a last option

Something to consider is that David Lee is attractive now because of how he produces for his salary, once he signs his new contract his value will drop somewhat, so now is as good a time to trade him as any.

D-Lee42fan
Jan 03, 2009, 23:51
no, i want D-LEE here in NY. its not my decision but we should sign this guy for a monster contract and keep him, same with nate. LEE has proved his worth, especially so far this season, hes played outta position and hasnt complained, i live in Denver and LEE for picks and atkins isnt worth it all, i wouldnt even trade him if we got kleiza instead.

Knicker23
Jan 04, 2009, 01:45
i'm not too familiar with Klieza, or what his contract deal is...but Dlee seems to be the only guy that plays relatively well on a consistent basis for us, but then again his D isn't the best.. idk what good we'd get trading him for this guy..Dlee's averageing like 5 pts better a game so unless it saves us money i'm not sure the point...if we have to pick between dlee and nate, as much as i like lee, i'd have to go with nate...if we can rope curry into anything we should do it..but no trades like this should be done if the contracts don't expire before FA yr or too much money

Arod2k9
Jan 04, 2009, 07:07
I used to be very high on David Lee and thought by this time he would be a better passer and defender. His rebounding has always been there and his jumper is getting better. However, I would not sign Lee to a 5 yr 50 mil contract. He ain't no Tom Gugliotta, lol one of my favorite players of all time. That was a complete player worthy of money like that. I would trade Lee now and we know is a matter of time before they do it. Same with Nate, do you think the Knicks finally get under the cap in 2010 to jeopardize the future for two role players. What is the obsession with Lee and Nate, cuz I don't see it. Both players are replaceable and Nate's dancing before games is something that I hate and is so unprofessional. I want both traded for picks and expiring deals even if the picks are late 1st round before the trade deadline. Guys, finishing with 40 wins this year and making the playoffs will be horrible for us. We need to win 29-31 and get a Top 8 pick in '09 draft. I want a freaking championship not just be good. :thumbsup:

OGKnickfan
Jan 04, 2009, 08:39
This team is essentially disintegrating, before our very eyes, and, when offers are finally made to Lebron, Wade or Bosh, there's not going to be much of a team for them to play with. And, as has been said, by numerous members of the sports media, the Knicks need to have a decent team, if they're going to attract big talent. Why would anyone, after all, want to be the best player on a ****ty team?

I don't think of Lee as unexpendable, by the way, but we need to keep a solid core of players, in order to attract one or more of those big 2010 prospects. Lee is certainly the type of player that could attract players to us. I'd say Duhon, Chandler and Nate Robinson are integral to that core, in addition to whomever else we can keep from amongst the likes of Lee or maybe Al Harrington, who might make a decent third or fourth option.

I thought, like a few other posters: ABCD and MSG, for example, that, this year, we had a decent team, finally, ala 2003, when we had Nazr Mohammed at center, that could have competed for a playoff spot. But, ironically, just like 2003, we traded the main contributers to that possibility: Zach and Crawford.

I know that we need a top caliber player, in order to become an elite team, but, for now, I would have settled for winning, some real self-esteem. We could have kept Crawford and Zach, and, instead of the skeleton of a team we've been left with, have simply saved that money for the signing of a real leader for our team, preferably Dwyane Wade, whom I consider the best player in the league.

Oh, well... I'm not the GM.

DaTPRiNCE
Jan 04, 2009, 12:44
theres a newer rumor about them "getting serious" about David Lee, if the give us aldridge, Fernandez, Outlaw or Bayless packaged with a pick or so i'd take it

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/56375/20090104/sources_blazers_getting_serious_for_david_lee/

TheBigCock
Jan 04, 2009, 13:16
I actually am in favor of trading Lee. Don't get me wrong I am a D-Lee fan and I wish him luck where ever he goes ,but we have a surplus at forward spot. We need some guards. If we can snag Bayliss or Rodriguez and a first that would be great. We get a young guard with potential and we will now have 2 good draft picks in this year's draft.

knicklover
Jan 04, 2009, 13:36
I used to be very high on David Lee and thought by this time he would be a better passer and defender. His rebounding has always been there and his jumper is getting better. However, I would not sign Lee to a 5 yr 50 mil contract. He ain't no Tom Gugliotta, lol one of my favorite players of all time. That was a complete player worthy of money like that. I would trade Lee now and we know is a matter of time before they do it. Same with Nate, do you think the Knicks finally get under the cap in 2010 to jeopardize the future for two role players. What is the obsession with Lee and Nate, cuz I don't see it. Both players are replaceable and Nate's dancing before games is something that I hate and is so unprofessional. I want both traded for picks and expiring deals even if the picks are late 1st round before the trade deadline. Guys, finishing with 40 wins this year and making the playoffs will be horrible for us. We need to win 29-31 and get a Top 8 pick in '09 draft. I want a freaking championship not just be good. :thumbsup:


I think you are correct.

The obsession with Lee and Nate is a function of the team being so horrible.

They are two of the best players on the team and they are young. So most people have very inflated views of their skill.

This is not meant to knock either player, but Nate is still an "off the bench" sparkplug type player and IMO will always be that.

Lee is still a borderline starter or dynamite 6th man. He gets the boards and scores low double digits efficiently, but he can't block shots and his defense is weak. He's not a total package PF that deserves big dollars or even starters minutes unless he's used with a certain type of Center than can make up for his dificiencies.

DaTPRiNCE
Jan 04, 2009, 15:01
I actually am in favor of trading Lee. Don't get me wrong I am a D-Lee fan and I wish him luck where ever he goes ,but we have a surplus at forward spot. We need some guards. If we can snag Bayliss or Rodriguez and a first that would be great. We get a young guard with potential and we will now have 2 good draft picks in this year's draft.

Co-Sign:thumbsup:

_______√ictory_______
Jan 04, 2009, 15:09
theres a newer rumor about them "getting serious" about David Lee, if the give us aldridge, Fernandez, Outlaw or Bayless packaged with a pick or so i'd take it

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/56375/20090104/sources_blazers_getting_serious_for_david_lee/
i don't see why they'd want bayless.he's talented but he just doesn't fit to me.he's a combo guard.we need an actual shooting guard.duhon and nate should be our points.i wouldn't even care for aldridge which they won't actually trade.(atleast i don't think so).
fernandez would light up msg daily.god i hope it's fernandez.

duhon
fernandez
chandler
harrington- gallinari
curry?:alert:
sounds fine to me.
but that's the problem with trading dave man.
he kinda feels like our actual franchise player.
i would hate to see him go.

JayJ44
Jan 04, 2009, 15:22
theres a newer rumor about them "getting serious" about David Lee, if the give us aldridge, Fernandez, Outlaw or Bayless packaged with a pick or so i'd take it

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/56375/20090104/sources_blazers_getting_serious_for_david_lee/

If we can get Bayless and a 1st rounder, then definitely pull the trigger. Bayless is a great scorer, but he can still play the point. Plus, he'd be great in this system. I think he'll be kinda like Monta Ellis, but a better PG. Unfortunately, real gm is never accurate, hope I'm wrong though. I would definitely be cool with Fernandez too. :pray:

DaTPRiNCE
Jan 04, 2009, 15:27
bayless and a first rounder would be great for us in the future

Bayless/Nate(6th man)
?/
Chandler/Gallo
Harrington/
Monroe(draft him)/

or instead of harrington we sign someone like Amare or Bosh, just complete the bench and were straight

we could also have Chandler at the 2 and Gallo at the 3

rollingstone
Jan 04, 2009, 15:32
theres a newer rumor about them "getting serious" about David Lee, if the give us aldridge, Fernandez, Outlaw or Bayless packaged with a pick or so i'd take it

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/56375/20090104/sources_blazers_getting_serious_for_david_lee/

aldridge + pick or rudy + pick is of course not happening, Blazers arent that stupid. Outlaw adds to our SF logjam + i dont think he's available.

but Bayless + pick is very interesting, in the worst case we have a pick and a cheap combo till 2010. In the best case, if he develops, we can have him cheap till 2012.
If Bayless plays well, we can use him to make another deal next year, possibly to move Curry.
I'd sign on this one, although Kleiza+ 2 picks would be better

DontForgetDerekHarper
Jan 04, 2009, 15:51
yeah dude I dont care if we win 30 games this year, and 15 the next year, we by not signing Lee and Nate and letting them walk that essentially ( if you look at the prospective contracts of nate and lee being 10 mil a year a piece) you are saving another 20 million dollars in salary cap. Now we talk about why would a player want to be the best player on a ****ty team, illl tell you why because there can possibly be 3 best players on a sick team ( remember when every one said Jesus Shuttlesworth, The Big Ticket, and THe truth were three very good players on a team with NO BODY ElSE----then they went on to win the title and now come back looking better than last year. If the knicks land Dirk (who I can see coming here for less money due to his age at the time) Wade and Amare...coupled with the likes of Chandler, Gallinari, and Chris duhon who I feel they will resign for less money than nate will ask for come 2010, bunched with our pick this year, and a few signings here or there will the left overs. how can you not call a line up of

duhon
wade
chandler
Amare
Nowitzki

with Gallinari being our sixth man

get a bunch of hard nose defenders off the bench for us

and we have a 57 win team easy.

with the 20 mil being saved on lee and nate

being dispursed along with the money from zach and crawfords deals

with Q, Malik, James, marbury, contracts done by this year and next.

I THINK WE ARE ALL UNDERESTIMATING THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE KNICKS IN 2 YEARS TIME.

alrobinson6022
Jan 04, 2009, 16:25
I think you are correct.

The obsession with Lee and Nate is a function of the team being so horrible.

They are two of the best players on the team and they are young. So most people have very inflated views of their skill.

This is not meant to knock either player, but Nate is still an "off the bench" sparkplug type player and IMO will always be that.

Lee is still a borderline starter or dynamite 6th man. He gets the boards and scores low double digits efficiently, but he can't block shots and his defense is weak. He's not a total package PF that deserves big dollars or even starters minutes unless he's used with a certain type of Center than can make up for his dificiencies.

great points. i'm tired of watching david lee's defense. he gets beat all of the time. he just stands there and puts both hands up in the air. it's really sad because the rest of this game is pretty good.

_______√ictory_______
Jan 04, 2009, 16:54
yeah dude I dont care if we win 30 games this year, and 15 the next year, we by not signing Lee and Nate and letting them walk that essentially ( if you look at the prospective contracts of nate and lee being 10 mil a year a piece) you are saving another 20 million dollars in salary cap. Now we talk about why would a player want to be the best player on a ****ty team, illl tell you why because there can possibly be 3 best players on a sick team ( remember when every one said Jesus Shuttlesworth, The Big Ticket, and THe truth were three very good players on a team with NO BODY ElSE----then they went on to win the title and now come back looking better than last year. If the knicks land Dirk (who I can see coming here for less money due to his age at the time) Wade and Amare...coupled with the likes of Chandler, Gallinari, and Chris duhon who I feel they will resign for less money than nate will ask for come 2010, bunched with our pick this year, and a few signings here or there will the left overs. how can you not call a line up of

duhon
wade
chandler
Amare
Nowitzki

with Gallinari being our sixth man

get a bunch of hard nose defenders off the bench for us

and we have a 57 win team easy.

with the 20 mil being saved on lee and nate

being dispursed along with the money from zach and crawfords deals

with Q, Malik, James, marbury, contracts done by this year and next.

I THINK WE ARE ALL UNDERESTIMATING THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE KNICKS IN 2 YEARS TIME.
i would hate to have novi.the guy runs like his legs are gonna snap in half in the middle of a fast break.
i don't want nash or novi here.they're geezers all ready.and i love steve, but we can't sign these guys on what they've done.no amare either.i just don't like his game.bosh and wade would be my choices for free agents.
if we somehow get fernandez for lee, lebron in 2010, and hopefully gallo would be improved, those 3 alone would make crazy noise.all we would need is someone like thabeet, or monroe, maybe boozer,and a pass first point with great d.that is alot though...........

LJ4ptplay
Jan 04, 2009, 20:07
David Lee + Nate + Curry to Portland for Sergio Rodriguez + Rudy Fernandez + Raef LaFrenze (expiring) would work.

The Spanish Connection plus more cap relief.

rollingstone
Jan 04, 2009, 20:20
yea, but Isiah isn't working in Portland, they have a pretty good GM there

Paul1355
Jan 04, 2009, 21:33
David Lee + Nate + Curry to Portland for Sergio Rodriguez + Rudy Fernandez + Raef LaFrenze (expiring) would work.

The Spanish Connection plus more cap relief.

I dont know if Portland would give up Rudy Fernandez because Roy's contract expires in two years so who's going to back him up? Martell Webster is good but who knows?

That idea sounds good.

And Nate is huge for us but with Sergio and Rudy we don't have to worry on the offense.

Losing Lee would hurt us more than anything with this move.

rollingstone
Jan 04, 2009, 22:12
come on guys, Rudy+expiring for Curry+Lee+Nate? why would Portland do it?
Lee and Nate are backups in Portland, behind Aldridge and Roy. AND they are both heading to FA, which is big minus to any GM who wants to trade for them. While Rudy is on a cheap deal till 2012 and super talented.

Rudy alone is worth more than Lee+Nate because of his upside and contract situation, why would they take on Curry too?

Kevin Pritchard is probably the best GM in the league right now. We aren't going to fool him. We got to think more realistically.

A package like Rudy+Outlaw+LaFrentz's expiring would be good enough to get a legit player from bad team - like Antawn Jamison or Vince. Blazers won't use their assets to get our trash like Curry

_______√ictory_______
Jan 04, 2009, 22:26
come on guys, Rudy+expiring for Curry+Lee+Nate? why would Portland do it?
Lee and Nate are backups in Portland, behind Aldridge and Roy. AND they are both heading to FA, which is big minus to any GM who wants to trade for them. While Rudy is on a cheap deal till 2012 and super talented.

Rudy alone is worth more than Lee+Nate because of his upside and contract situation, why would they take on Curry too?

Kevin Pritchard is probably the best GM in the league right now. We aren't going to fool him. We got to think more realistically.


that's why i would say lee for fernandez straight up.
we can't get greedy.rudy has great upside,
and lee is as good as he'll ever be.i think he can contribute to that team in alot of ways, he doesn't have to be a scoring option, he could be an off the bench type of rodman for them.they got roy and a great young core and a billionaire owner.as far as the free agency let them figure that out. the point is to get as many blue chippers we can, by either draft or trade , who'll be integral to our team in the future.

WVKnickfan
Jan 04, 2009, 23:03
It makes me laugh when I see some of you guys putting down Lees defense like he is the only one out there playing that can't play defense.Look at our team they ALL suck playing defense!!! THEY give up over 100 +points a game.Not just Lee,its the whole team for gods sake... Throwing one player under the bus for bad defense and not the whole team is BS.Lee is our heart and soul and the best on the team when it comes to all the forwards yet you want to trade him off.If the Knicks front office was smart they would hurry up and sign Lee to another contract and don't tell me they can't spend the money on him b/c they can and should.

You guys always talk about some of the posters on here are obsessed with Lee.Will I have a simular question for some of you... Why is everybody so obessed with Chandler?? He can't play defense,he can't shoot 80% of the time,takes terrible shots,always has turnovers yet you would rather have him than Lee lol.Im sorry but I just can't figure out why you would want to keep a player like Chandler who might be a good player in the future rather than keep a player like Lee who has already proven what he can do EVERYNIGHT.

Now before the Chandler fans come bashing me I want to add I don't have nothing againist the guy.He may turn out to be a good NBA player.What im talking about thow is now!! If the knicks are going to trade some forwards off then IMO they should trade Jeffries,Chandler before they even think about trading D-Lee b/c he is clearly the best out of the forwards right now and he can and will help the Knicks win b/c he always shows up and the stats don't lie.

clumsy
Jan 04, 2009, 23:38
Lee is not our heart and soul. He might be yours yours because he is the "best" player on a bad team. Don't fall into the trap. People who love Marbury to death use this same argument (i like him for a different reason, cuz he was exciting as hell to watch when he was younger). If anyone is our heart i'd say that it is no one....we aren't a winning team. My opinon is this squad just isn't talented enough at all positions (they are exciting tho).

2. Lee is a nice player but he will never be a number one option. And it is STUPID to give him 10 mil. Wilson Chandler has that potential; he's more complete. He has better range, and gets to the line pretty consistently. Trust me we can find another David Lee in the draft not even in the lottery area.

clumsy
Jan 04, 2009, 23:52
i think a fair contract for nate is about 5-6. 6-7 for lee.

I wonder if we can either frontload 3 year contracts so in 10' its' not that much. ORRRRR we can promise those two a lot of advertisement opportunity where they will be making money outside of basketball.

rollingstone
Jan 04, 2009, 23:54
If Wilson was heading into FA, we would have rumors about Chandler trades as well. But as it is, he's cheap material for 2010 team, along with Gallinari and future picks.

No player on this team would be a top 3 option on a contender, except maybe Al - but that's a big MAYBE. We shouldnt overpay any of our guys.
If Lee accepts money that contenders pay for their no. 4-7 option - like 6 mil a year or below - I will be the happiest man.

But all these rumors about Knicks offering Lee around the league indicate that probably Walsh doesnt believe that he can resign David within a reason.
And if we can't resign him, we better get some value for 2010 for him.

Arod2k9
Jan 05, 2009, 01:55
WVKnickfan (http://www.knicksonline.com/forums/member.php?u=1149),

Is not about the Knicks not having the money to sign David Lee or Nate, IS ABOUT HAVING CAP FLEXIBILITY for 2010! If a cap didn't exist like MLB the Knicks would be throwing money to free agents like the Yankees. With the CAP though you can't and why it is important to not re-sign Lee or Nate. If the Knicks sign both it would be consider one of the dumbest moves in all of sports. You got to give yourself a chance at free agency in two years. Is in it common sense that both Lee and Nate will get traded or not re-sign? Why would Walsh trade Crawford/Randolph to be in position to be 27 million BELOW the CAP to then sign Lee/Nate? This is the plan and D'antoni and Walsh won't go away from it trust me on that.

About what you said about us picking on Lee's defense, well he's slow foot and he's not doing the job in the interior. If he is just putting his hands up and not blocking shots or taking charges he is not worthy of 10mil per. I'm sorry but Chandler has much more of an upside than Lee. Lee has to sweat like crazy to get 9 rebounds, lol. Chandler block shots, poise, more athletic, and has leadership skills within more than your Lee will ever have.

My question to you is do you want to have Lee and continue to win 25 games or do you want to win a championship? I want what the Celtics have, been a Knick fan since 1990 going to the finals aint going to make me happy. 1992 game 7 at bulls, 1993 ECF games 5/6 , 1994 games 6/7 finals , 1995 games 1 and 7 vs pacers, 1997 suspensions vs heat, 1999 finals Johson's injury still lingers as a Knick fan and all those loses still hurt.

It is nothing againts Lee is that us pure Knick fans want more than than what this franchise has been since Ewing, Oakley, Starks, Riley, Mason, Harper, left...

Knixy
Jan 05, 2009, 10:27
I have no problem keeping David Lee as long as it's a reasonable contract and it doesn't effect 2010. In the end, we're talking about a backup PF on a good team. At best, Lee is Anthony Mason. You do not spend $8M-$10M on a player to play that role. Lee is not a starting PF. He's limited offensively and awful defensively.

WVKnickfan
Jan 06, 2009, 00:20
WVKnickfan (http://www.knicksonline.com/forums/member.php?u=1149),

Is not about the Knicks not having the money to sign David Lee or Nate, IS ABOUT HAVING CAP FLEXIBILITY for 2010! If a cap didn't exist like MLB the Knicks would be throwing money to free agents like the Yankees. With the CAP though you can't and why it is important to not re-sign Lee or Nate. If the Knicks sign both it would be consider one of the dumbest moves in all of sports. You got to give yourself a chance at free agency in two years. Is in it common sense that both Lee and Nate will get traded or not re-sign? Why would Walsh trade Crawford/Randolph to be in position to be 27 million BELOW the CAP to then sign Lee/Nate? This is the plan and D'antoni and Walsh won't go away from it trust me on that.

About what you said about us picking on Lee's defense, well he's slow foot and he's not doing the job in the interior. If he is just putting his hands up and not blocking shots or taking charges he is not worthy of 10mil per. I'm sorry but Chandler has much more of an upside than Lee. Lee has to sweat like crazy to get 9 rebounds, lol. Chandler block shots, poise, more athletic, and has leadership skills within more than your Lee will ever have.

My question to you is do you want to have Lee and continue to win 25 games or do you want to win a championship? I want what the Celtics have, been a Knick fan since 1990 going to the finals aint going to make me happy. 1992 game 7 at bulls, 1993 ECF games 5/6 , 1994 games 6/7 finals , 1995 games 1 and 7 vs pacers, 1997 suspensions vs heat, 1999 finals Johson's injury still lingers as a Knick fan and all those loses still hurt.

It is nothing againts Lee is that us pure Knick fans want more than than what this franchise has been since Ewing, Oakley, Starks, Riley, Mason, Harper, left...

Hey listen David Lee would help us tremendously during the 2010 year when and if we sign a big name or two.You can't let a player go when you are'nt even sure if we will sign anybody.James isn't going nowhere b/c he will sign with the Cavs soon after the season ends.He would be stupid to leave a great team to come and play for us.Bosh is on a playoff team and I don't see him coming here and Wade will stay in Miami.All im saying is that we are taking a huge gamble if we let Lee go then not make as huge of a impact like everyone is saying.

You can bash Lees defense all you want and yes I agree he isn't good defensivly BUT look at everybody on the team they ALL suck.You can't just talk about one guys defense when he isn't the only one out there.Yes Chandler does block some shots and he is more athletic than Lee yet Lee is by far the better of the two right now.Chandler has a long ways to go to become the player you think he already is.80% of the time his shooting is flat out terrible and his defense is far from good.Chandler has more leadership than Lee? Give me a break you never see him try and lead the team.


So you are saying the only reason why we only win 25 games is b/c of Lee lol? Brother the last I checked basketball is a TEAM sport not just one guy.To answer your question yes I want more than 25 wins a season and I want a championship but we are a long long long way from even contending for a title.You say you have been a Knicks fan since 90 right?Well bud I have you beat in that catigory b/c I have been a Knicks fan since 84 and I have been threw the good and the bad.Watched them suck in the 80s and watched them become a powerhouse in the 90's now im watching them suck again.So if that does'nt put me as a PURE KNICK FAN then nobody on this site is

If its nothing againist Lee and you want a championship team then you better trade all the players away not only lee b/c like I said we are far far from becoming a contender that wins chanpionships.Again I think Lee could and would help us in the future by coming off the bench and to let him go and keep the other bums like Jeffries,Rose,James would be a very stupid move.If you want to become a contender then you can't let players like Lee go.

rollingstone
Jan 06, 2009, 00:42
Hey listen David Lee would help us tremendously during the 2010 year when and if we sign a big name or two.You can't let a player go when you are'nt even sure if we will sign anybody.James isn't going nowhere b/c he will sign with the Cavs soon after the season ends.He would be stupid to leave a great team to come and play for us.Bosh is on a playoff team and I don't see him coming here and Wade will stay in Miami.All im saying is that we are taking a huge gamble if we let Lee go then not make as huge of a impact like everyone is saying.

You can bash Lees defense all you want and yes I agree he isn't good defensivly BUT look at everybody on the team they ALL suck.You can't just talk about one guys defense when he isn't the only one out there.Yes Chandler does block some shots and he is more athletic than Lee yet Lee is by far the better of the two right now.Chandler has a long ways to go to become the player you think he already is.80% of the time his shooting is flat out terrible and his defense is far from good.Chandler has more leadership than Lee? Give me a break you never see him try and lead the team.


So you are saying the only reason why we only win 25 games is b/c of Lee lol? Brother the last I checked basketball is a TEAM sport not just one guy.To answer your question yes I want more than 25 wins a season and I want a championship but we are a long long long way from even contending for a title.You say you have been a Knicks fan since 90 right?Well bud I have you beat in that catigory b/c I have been a Knicks fan since 84 and I have been threw the good and the bad.Watched them suck in the 80s and watched them become a powerhouse in the 90's now im watching them suck again.So if that does'nt put me as a PURE KNICK FAN then nobody on this site is

If its nothing againist Lee and you want a championship team then you better trade all the players away not only lee b/c like I said we are far far from becoming a contender that wins chanpionships.Again I think Lee could and would help us in the future by coming off the bench and to let him go and keep the other bums like Jeffries,Rose,James would be a very stupid move.If you want to become a contender then you can't let players like Lee go.

so in short, Lee suks on defence, but we all suck, so lets give Lee the money, and screw cap space, because in 2010 we may get noone anyway?

yuk...
i dont like this plan at all
we may not get LeBron, but we may get someone else. And instead of giving 8-10 mil a year to one of our limited guys, we may sign a couple of hard-nosed veterans
sorry, but surrendering Knicks future for sentiments towards Lee is silly. Well anyway, Im sure Walsh wont work on sentiments

Arod2k9
Jan 06, 2009, 08:56
Totally agree w/u rollingstone,

You took the words that I want to say. I took Lee 4 years to be a good role player, and it only took Chandler 2 years to look like a future all star. To me Chandler is an excellent defender and alot of tenacity to his game. Lee is soft and doesn't even jump/or takes the hit in the lane. Oh I get it you must be one of those fans that thinks were are 1 good player away! Not at all, the only 2 Knicks that the team will still have come 2010 is Gallinari/Chandler. The others will not be resign and I hope Walsh doesn't get away from the plan. Do you think that none of the free agents is coming to New York? They will make half of their money just on advertising!!!

CoolClyde
Jan 06, 2009, 10:41
...David Lee would help us tremendously during the 2010 year when and if we sign a big name or two.You can't let a player go when you are'nt even sure if we will sign anybody...All im saying is that we are taking a huge gamble if we let Lee go then not make as huge of a impact like everyone is saying.

So you are saying the only reason why we only win 25 games is b/c of Lee lol? Brother the last I checked basketball is a TEAM sport not just one guy.
...If you want to become a contender then you can't let players like Lee go.


TRUTH! We already traded away our 2 best players (statwise) for this 2010 plan that may or not lure JamesBoshWade; we need to keep DLEE, one of the best PF in the league. His offense, rebounding and Knick savvy outweighs his defensive lapses, by far. Money isn't everything, quality counts, and the 2010 class knows it. David Lee is quality.

_______√ictory_______
Jan 06, 2009, 11:46
i know it sucks for a lee fan but that's the game.that's who everybody wants.
maybe we won't need to sign to free agents.maybe "23" will have his pippen in chandler come 2010.we don't know. all this is about positioning ourselves to have a better team.

duhon?
chandler
lebron?
lee-gallinari?
bosh?
i don't know whether or not those players are gonna wanna come here.
we need to be realistic.we don't necessarily need to sign two free agents.
hopefully gallo will have proved himself some by then.then we'll have our own 2 stars if chandler keeps improving.all i know is, it would be nice to have an actually center that does center ****.

metrocard
Jan 06, 2009, 13:21
I like Lee a lot, but rolling stone has a point.

Look at free agents like Bosh, Amare...I would definitely not mind losing Lee to sign them.