Trading Curry for unguaranteed contracts?

[clydewally]

Please let me know if this works.

Dallas has two large unguaranteed contracts in Dampier ($13.1 million) and Najera ($3 million). They have an option on Barea for $1.8 million.

Are Knicks allowed to do a sign and trade of David Lee (assume $11 million) and Curry ($11.3) for the above three Mavs and then waive Dampier and Najera? The numbers for the trade work under the cap and the Knicks would be left with a one year $1.8 million contract on the cap for Barea after waiving the other two Mavs.

Obviously, Knicks only do this if Lee isn't in their plans.

[Dunkenstein]

I can't see why this deal couldn't be done.

[FGump]

Najera's contract under that scenario (after 7/1) would be fully guaranteed so he'd have a sizable cap hit and salary payout due ...

Also Lee would have base year rules on a contract that big that might get in the way somehow on that exact deal ... too busy at the moment to work the numbers by hand and check it out....

But otherwise the deal might work as you described.

[clydewally]

Thanks. I wouldn't think the BYC would impact this as the Knicks are under the cap. My understanding of BYC is that receiving team has to take in the whole salary, but the team trading the BYC player could only take back salaries matching the BYC calculation for that player.

[Dunkenstein]

Lately, when I think of the Knicks' free agent plans this summer, I keep thinking of the childrens fairy tale "The Emperor Has No Clothes". Donnie Walsh has done a commendable job of amassing cap room to spend on free agents this summer and clydewally's scenario would give them even more.

But the more I read and the more I think about it, I can easily see a situation where no top free agent will want to go to the Knicks. Were the Knicks able to sign a free agent or two, they would have virtually no supporting cast. The situations in Chicago, Miami, now Washington with Wall, and even the Clippers are more attractive than that of the Knicks. Plus why would LeBron, Wade or Amare want to leave their playoff teams to join the rag-tag bunch in New York who have lottery written all over them?

And the other issue likely to turn off prospective free agents is the fans and the media. They're the toughest in the country. After suffering through several miserable seasons with the mantra of "it'll all get better in the summer of 2010", this is going to put a lot of pressure on whichever free agents might agree to come to New York. If the Knicks don't achieve an amazing turnaround, the unforgiving NY media and fans are going to dump a boatload of scorn on them. Is it really worth it?

Recently, I've started hearing the latest cop-out: "Maybe the Knicks should save some of their cap room for next summer, so that they can go after Melo." Today's report that the Nuggets and Melo's people are now meeting to discuss a three-year extension to his current contract looks like it's going to put the kibosh to that pipe dream.

Historically, the NY media and fans have always thought every attractive player wants to come play in New York--"The Mecca of Basketball". I think that may once again prove to be a childrens fairy tale.

[JES12]

I agree with Dunkenstein. I don't see the major free agents signing in New York because of the supporting cast. In fact, I see that same Dampier unguaranteed contract (that is not being wasted on Curry) bringing a major free agent to Dallas before New York gets one.

[FGump]

I think for SOME free agents, the supporting cast in NY may be a factor. But for others, they'll pursue NY's pile of green just as much as anyone else's and it will come down to how much they're willing to pay. Or not.

[loserX]

It looks like it would be legal, since BYC would not apply to David Lee (although FGump is right that Najera's contract would stay on the books).

In the real world, of course, I can't imagine the Mavericks paying $22M for the services of David Lee (since Curry is worthless), doubled by luxury taxes, next year alone.