From NY Knicks Board

[90sB-BallRocked]

"Interestingly, Crawford is believed to be on Cleveland's radar as well, not surprising considering the Cavs continue to look for pieces to surround LeBron James.

Trade Jamal Crawford for Damon Jones(expires next season), Ira Newble(expiring contract), and a 1st rd Pick...

OR

Trade Jamal Crawford to Indiana for Marquis Daniels and 1st Rd Pick..."

this is from a poster on their board

Would you do a deal of Daniels for Crawford? We lose defense but get a big timer scorer. I would pull the trigger

New Line-up

PG Tinsley/Diener
SG Crawford/Rush
SF Danny Granger/Williams
PF Mike Dunleavy/Diogu
C J O'neal / Foster/Murphy

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I don't know that I would. Daniels can score at will, Crawford is a little more inconsistent. Daniels provides a spark off the bench and Rush is basically playing like Crawford with defense right now anyway.

[granger05]

I'd consider Daniels for Crawford, but that trade includes us giving up a first. No more trading first round picks for us please. We're a borderline playoff team right now that may decide to trade either our only starting-quality PG or our defensive anchor in the next month or so. We need our picks.

[count55]

No way I'd give up a first rounder for Crawford.

[glasket]

I would never do that deal. Giving up Daniels AND a 1st is way too much.

I wouldn't even trade Crawford and Daniels straight up

[jeremy1215]

I'd give Daniels for Crawford, but not the first. I'm not a fan of Daniels at all. But I also wouldn't want to start Crawford, so he would have to accept a bench role.

Tinsley(:nonono:)/Diener
Rush/Crawford
Granger/Williams
Dunleavy/Murphy
JO/Foster

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I would never do that deal. Giving up Daniels AND a 1st is way too much.

I wouldn't even trade Crawford and Daniels straight up

I didn't even realize a 1st was included. I'm with you.

[a-rod]

please no Crawford and his law basketball IQ

[ahartleyvu]

How about this instead:

NY trades:
- Jamal Crawford
- Fred Jones

Indiana trades:
- Marquis Daniels
- Jamaal Tinsley
- 2nd rounder

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

How about this instead:

NY trades:
- Jamal Crawford
- Fred Jones

Indiana trades:
- Marquis Daniels
- Jamaal Tinsley
- 2nd rounder

Close to same thing but we trade Tinsley for Fred Jones. Fred Jones has always been one of my all time favorite Pacers and I'd kill to have him back, but can Crawford run the point? Would he pass. If he would pass I think he'd thrive in our offense.

[notque]

How about this instead:

NY trades:
- Jamal Crawford
- Fred Jones

Indiana trades:
- Marquis Daniels
- Jamaal Tinsley
- 2nd rounder

No, how about this...

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/t ... &te=&cash=

[jeremy1215]

How about this instead:

NY trades:
- Jamal Crawford
- Fred Jones

Indiana trades:
- Marquis Daniels
- Jamaal Tinsley
- 2nd rounder

I love that deal, so much actually. I would even add in another 2nd if that made them more interested.

Diener/Jones
Rush/Crawford
Granger/Williams
Dunleavy/Murphy
JO/Foster

[jeremy1215]

-= original quote snipped =-



No, how about this...

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/t ... &te=&cash=

I'd do that too but the Knicks won't, they won't even give Lee for Artest let alone Tinsley.

[notque]

If Isiah really thinks Artest will sign for the midlevel to be on the knicks, I don't see how he could turn down that deal.

[knicksNOTslick]

-= original quote snipped =-



No, how about this...

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/t ... &te=&cash=

With all due respect, Lee has more value than that. He might be overrated because he's a fan fave.

I'm gonna try to be really really fair on this one. I know I'm a Knick fan so I'll watch out for that.

The Crawford, Jones for Daniels, Tinsley and 2nd rounder is a close one but I wouldn't do it as a Knick fan.

Yes, Crawford is inconsistent but he's consistent in keeping the Knicks competitive. We're a bad team right now but he's been a bright spot for us, that I can admit. I'm not a fan of his game though and would love to see him traded now while his value is still high.

Would you guys be willing to do a Crawford, Jones for Daniels, Tinsley and a 1st (that is lottery protected now and maybe top 10 protected later and so forth)?

Tinsley's value is low right now so it's either Indiana trades him low now and cut ties or wait for him to get his value high.

Any way to get Dunleavy off Indiana's hands?

[count55]

I wouldn't give a first round pick for Crawford, regardless of the protection. I don't think he's a particularly large upgrade over Daniels (if at all), and his contract is actually Murphy-like in it's gawdawfulness.

Jones has absolutely no value in this deal as the Crawford contract overwhelms the value of the expiring.

In fact, from a contract perspective, the deal hurts our flexibility in the 09-10 and 10-11, right when we're looking at Danny, Ike, and Shawne coming due.

So it doesn't particularly help us financially, and leaves us with Crawford, Owens and Diener at the point, takes one of our best bench players away, and we get to kick in a 1st rounder to boot.

There has been a consistent undercurrent on this board for a number of years to get Jamal Crawford. I just don't get the attraction. To me, it's reminiscent of the kid with metal fork in his hand staring longingly at electricity outlet. Beyond the fact that he's a horribly inconsistent shooter with a shot selection that makes Droopy look positively shy, he hasn't been on a team that has won more than 33 games in his seven year career. This years, the Knicks are on track for 25 wins.

I'm not saying that Tinsley has much, if any value. I just don't see the need to cut our nose off to spite our face.

[FreeRon]

You guys might as well take the first out, we're not allowed to trade it if we wanted to. If Tinsley's value is so low that it costs us to get rid of him, we'll buy out his contract rather than giving up a pick. I might consider Marquis for Crawford, but I still probably wouldn't do it because of the attitude problems I've heard he's had on top of his inconsistency. Basically everything that makes Tinsley a negative Crawford has going against him to a lesser extent.

[fdefore]

just spit ballin'



NEW YORK RECEIVES: Tinsley, Murphy

INDIANA RECEIVES: Banks, Richardson, Rose, 08 1st (PHX)

PHOENIX RECEIVES: Robinson, Harrison


New York gets a new that is more pass-first than Crawford and a 3pt shooting PF for the cost of an inactive player in rose, qrich's role on the team can be easily replaced by jones/jeffries/murphy and they give up nate robinson but keep lee, balkman and chandler.

marbury / tinsley / collins
crawford / jones
balkman / jeffries / chandler
randolph / lee / murphy
curry / morris / james


Phoenix gets an upgrade on backup PG for Nash and depth at C, without taking on terrible contracts and giving up banks' terrible deal and a pick which they probably wouldn't have kept.

nash / robinson
bell / barbosa / piatkowski / strawberry
hill / diaw / tucker
marion / skinner
stoudemire / marks / harrison


Indiana gives up on the tinsley era and moves banks into the starting PG spot - he isn't a 3pt threat but he is a good defender. they get rose who they can either buy-out or keep to use as an exp. deal over the summer. q-rich will fit better than murphy in our new small-ball. PHX would add the first (which they're not fond of keeping anyway) to sweeten the banks contract.

banks / diener / owens
rush / richardson / graham
dunleavy / daniels
granger / williams / diogu
o'neal / foster / rose

[PacerGuy]

I see what you're trying to do, but I do not trust Q's back (uninsurable health issue there), & his production is way off t/y.

[PR07]

There is no way the Pacers should consider trading another first round pick unless it's Top 20 protected or for a star player. Crawford doesn't fit that criteria.