pros and Cons of this Cle/NY idea (Not a Zach trade)

[BBALLER4FR]

but you can't see the difference in Cleveland (who's going for a championship) and NY (who is no where near a championship)

Right. So a team nowhere near a championship should add pick(s) and/or rookie pay scale talent for the chance to cut Wally? I mean, you would have to assume NY would cut Wally since they are brimming with 2's and 3's making Wally unnecessary and even you have to admit his contribution doesn't even put NY on track for a championship. To boot the Knicks get older with the deal losing at least a 25 yr old Curry plus whatever Cleveland wished to bogart.

And where has anyone said the Cavs are trying to get a young center and 2 1sts?
There a lot of young centers out there though.. some who produce and some who are terrible, etc... Make sure you take into account character/desire/contracts and the like. Please don't be ignorant.

No one said that Cleveland is trying to get a young center and 2 1sts. But you did say...

I actually think Wally, 2nd for Curry, 1st or Chandler is fair value but Knick's fans hate that so that is my compromise to my original idea

Wally and a TERRIBLE 2nd for a C and (by your own statement) a EXCELLENT 1st. Meanwhile Marbury is way more productive and has a larger expiring as Wally (which has been said to be valuabe). So by default Marbury should at least net us what you're expecting from the Knicks but ideally more. I'm not being ignorant - I'm just using the very same logic you've laid out. You don't like it because you can't explain why my idea offers more from a salary saving aspect AND a production aspect, yet in your opinion mine is destined to fail while yours is a stroke of genius.

[bcortell]

but you can't see the difference in Cleveland (who's going for a championship) and NY (who is no where near a championship)

Right. So a team nowhere near a championship should add pick(s) and/or rookie pay scale talent for the chance to cut Wally? I mean, you would have to assume NY would cut Wally since they are brimming with 2's and 3's making Wally unnecessary and even you have to admit his contribution doesn't even put NY on track for a championship. To boot the Knicks get older with the deal losing at least a 25 yr old Curry plus whatever Cleveland wished to bogart.

And where has anyone said the Cavs are trying to get a young center and 2 1sts?
There a lot of young centers out there though.. some who produce and some who are terrible, etc... Make sure you take into account character/desire/contracts and the like. Please don't be ignorant.

No one said that Cleveland is trying to get a young center and 2 1sts. But you did say...

I actually think Wally, 2nd for Curry, 1st or Chandler is fair value but Knick's fans hate that so that is my compromise to my original idea

Wally and a TERRIBLE 2nd for a C and (by your own statement) a EXCELLENT 1st. Meanwhile Marbury is way more productive and has a larger expiring as Wally (which has been said to be valuabe). So by default Marbury should at least net us what you're expecting from the Knicks but ideally more. I'm not being ignorant - I'm just using the very same logic you've laid out. You don't like it because you can't explain why my idea offers more from a salary saving aspect AND a production aspect, yet in your opinion mine is destined to fail while yours is a stroke of genius.

You know what your trade leaves us as far as big man depth is concerned? Z, hickson. that's it... we lose production there. We have Mo who is a better PG than Starbury so he wouldn't play much, if at all.

An argument can be made that Starbury won't be more productive than Wally. And when you trade for an expiring it usually has nothing to do with their on the court production.

Again, you said a young center and 2 1sts. not me. I said an expiring and a 2nd for your young center (who has been disappointing as of late with a bad contract), and one 1st. Not an expiring for a young center and 2 1sts. Please don't just generalize it to young center. (I guess you didn't get my point in my previous post).

Also, teams don't just buyout players for the sake that they won't be very high on the depth chart. Otherwise, Starbury could very well have been cut by now. Also if you did get Wally, you may try to use him at the deadline. (Just like Starbury) or let him and Starbury expire to save you guys a ton of money next season.

He doesn't put you guys on track for a championship in the next season or two but gets you guys closer to having cap space sooner- which is the only way you will get back on track to a championship. You guys will be at or over the cap through the 2011/2012 season if you re-up david lee. That's three seasons with no hope for a championship (or even playoffs) while your FO pays a good deal of money for that team and some lux tax. You need to look at the trade more financially.

[cgf]

BBaller4FR's point would've been better made by saying that for Marbury's contract we should be able to get Bobby Simmons, Devin Harris and Yi or Lopez from the Nets. Which I assure you is as absurd as wally netting Curry and chandler.

[TheOUTLAW]

Seriously, you really don't have any Cavs wanting any of the Knicks players. So just stop trying to justify Randolphs value to us. We don't want. If hes worth so much find someone else that'd give you something of worth for him. I for one am not interested.

[bcortell]

BBaller4FR's point would've been better made by saying that for Marbury's contract we should be able to get Bobby Simmons, Devin Harris and Yi or Lopez from the Nets. Which I assure you is as absurd as wally netting Curry and chandler.

well Wally= Marbury in your example..

but that's where the similarities end.

curry is not equal to devin harris. chandler is not equal to Yi or Lopez.

and bobby simmons's contract doesn't go past 2010.

[BBALLER4FR]

You know what your trade leaves us as far as big man depth is concerned? Z, hickson. that's it... we lose production there. We have Mo who is a better PG than Starbury so he wouldn't play much, if at all.

Since when does caring how it effects the opposition matter when were dealing with expirings? Remember Wally for Curry/1st rounder? Complete disregard for NY other that the assumption that they will dump any and everything for expirings.

An argument can be made that Starbury won't be more productive than Wally. And when you trade for an expiring it usually has nothing to do with their on the court production.

Sure. An argument can also be made that Eric Snow will be an All-Star next season. Those types of arguments are known as grasping for straws.

Again, you said a young center and 2 1sts. not me.

For Marbury NOT for Wally, and it was to test your "expiring contracts are worth as much as we can heist" theory.

I said an expiring and a 2nd for your young center (who has been disappointing as of late with a bad contract), and one 1st. Not an expiring for a young center and 2 1sts. Please don't just generalize it to young center. (I guess you didn't get my point in my previous post).

He had a disappointing season with the addition of Zach NOT because he's a worthless, talentless piece only good for a salary dump. Walsh is not that stupid so I don't get why you assume Knick fans are that stupid just because you say $13,000,000 expiring. The least you could do is be real and call it how it is:

You'd be getting a young 7' PF with an excellent lowpost game to compliment a frontcourt of an immobile Z and 2 above average defenders who are also extremely offensive deficient while you groom Hickson - for an expiring.

Also, teams don't just buyout players for the sake that they won't be very high on the depth chart. Otherwise, Starbury could very well have been cut by now.

Which still has a chance of happening.

Also if you did get Wally, you may try to use him at the deadline. (Just like Starbury) or let him and Starbury expire to save you guys a ton of money next season.

Do you think we could get a C and a 1st for him or are you just blowing smoke? Yeah, I think you understand how difficult it is to get something useful for large expirings. Think Steve Francis, Stephon "I'm not as productive as Wally Z" Marbury, and Jalen Rose.

[b]He doesn't put you guys on track for a championship in the next season or two but gets you guys closer to having cap space sooner- which is the only way you will get back on track to a championship.You guys will be at or over the cap through the 2011/2012 season if you re-up david lee. That's three seasons with no hope for a championship (or even playoffs) while your FO pays a good deal of money for that team and some lux tax. You need to look at the trade more financially.

Oh goodie! So we would give up a 1st rounder for your generosity in assisting us on the right track???? What non-Isiah team does that?

[BBALLER4FR]

well Wally <<<< Marbury in your example..

but that's where the similarities end.

curry is not equal to devin harris. chandler is not equal to Yi or Lopez.

and bobby simmons's contract doesn't go past 2010.

Fixed. And there is where the my point was going, by production AND contract!

[bcortell]

You just don't get it..

[columbussports]

The cavs dont want curry, to lazy and to big of a contract. Now If the cavs cant get anything done at the deadline, i mean if you really cant broker a deal for a true number 2 guy, i wouldnt mind seeing a wallace and andy swap for marbury, only request I have is cavs get melik rose as well, he can give you the same as wallace for much less money, decent defense,solid rebounder and toughness, and just tell marbury to stay home and collect his check. In my mind the only pieces nyc has that the cavs could you is lee and crawford, i just dont think crawford and williams could play off each other well enough and lee is due a big pay day.
My nyc trade:

Knicks get
Andy- perfect for there new system
Wally- shooters prosper in his system plus 13 million expires
Pavlovich- shooter with potential and not a bad contract
Assortment of draft picks

Cavs get
Lee- solid young guy due a big pay day
crawford- can flat out score
rose- tough, rebounds , can teach hickson alot

[B Mac]

i mean if you really cant broker a deal for a true number 2 guy, i wouldnt mind seeing a wallace and andy swap for marbury

LeBron on Marbury:

"I cant have a player like that on my team."

Lets just say its safe to say he wont be on the Cavs anytime soon.

[columbussports]

never said i wanted marbury to play, but his contract is nice, gives the team more options because i really believe next off season is just as important for the cavs as 2010, 2009 is the last ditch effort to show lebron u can win in cleveland.

[LeQuitterNotMVP]

The cavs dont want curry, to lazy and to big of a contract. Now If the cavs cant get anything done at the deadline, i mean if you really cant broker a deal for a true number 2 guy, i wouldnt mind seeing a wallace and andy swap for marbury, only request I have is cavs get melik rose as well, he can give you the same as wallace for much less money, decent defense,solid rebounder and toughness, and just tell marbury to stay home and collect his check. In my mind the only pieces nyc has that the cavs could you is lee and crawford, i just dont think crawford and williams could play off each other well enough and lee is due a big pay day.
My nyc trade:

Knicks get
Andy- perfect for there new system
Wally- shooters prosper in his system plus 13 million expires
Pavlovich- shooter with potential and not a bad contract
Assortment of draft picks

Cavs get
Lee- solid young guy due a big pay day
crawford- can flat out score
rose- tough, rebounds , can teach hickson alot

As for the Wallace+Andy for Marbury+Rose trade, the Cavs would have Z and Rose in the post to play out the season. Uh...

Your other trade is solid, and I would do it, but I don't think the Knicks would do it.

[columbussports]

only reason the knicks might do it is lee really doesnt fit their system at all and I dont think they wanna pay him the big bucks, he could do well in cleveland. Plus i think if we get as many cavs players on the knicks lebron will def stay away from nyc in 2010 he'd be reliving his career.