Welcome to the Knicks Iman Shumpert

[bronxknicksfan1]

Crawford isnt the knicks crawford anymore. That was years ago. He was real good on atlanta and they were real good. Same with zach. Dudes playing great and in great shape. Better year than amare. But whatever hate away. Keep on pencilin shumperts and fields in as our allstar starting backcourt lol.

[Falstaffxx]

Wilson Chandler + Chris Paul + average Center would make this team championship contending. Would love Ill Will to be the backup pf/sf/sg. Messes with us signing Paul though. I dunno what this means, but Chandler is perfect for offf the bench with his versitility.

As you mentioned, it doesn't sound as if there's any way to get both Chandler and Chris Paul, unless Shumpert/Jordan/Harrellson turn out to be valuable prospects for a trade with New Orleans.

[mugzi]

If the MLE is reserved and we clear 16-17 mil next offseason we could get both. But thats a big if.

Plus I could be wrong. Lets say we signed CP3 then were at or over the cap, then we could use the MLE on Chandler if its still in existence right?

But I would love that, then we could try to trade Fields for a decent center in a sign and trade. Key being hed have to have a better season this year than his rookie campaign, if he averages 13/6 with good shooting percentages, we could sign him for 5-6 mil a year and trade him for a comparable center with a similar contract. {Gortat, Dalembert, Foster, Birdman, Jason Thompson- not really a center i know}

Problem is theres not many quality centers in the NBA but Id love to get Gortat. I think hed fit in well here. Hes tough can board and he can hit a jump shot. Sign two journeyman guards and we're set.

CP3/TD
Iman/Chandler
Melo/Chandler
STAT/Purp
{Gortat}/Jorts/Jordan

[mugzi]

Ah but thats also contingent on there being no season, cause isnt Chandler an UFA this year? Which means we have no shot at getting both.

[Falstaffxx]

Under the current rules, if it were 2012 right now, I'm not sure whether or not that would work. I thought the MLE was for teams that are at or over the cap, and I'm guessing being "over the cap" is determined at the start of the free agency period. IE, my thinking is that you can't cap out by signing someone and then say "we're now over the cap so we can use the MLE." I could be wrong though. It's been so long since we were under the cap I always took the MLE for granted as a fact of life.

[NYman15]

The fact is we have to wait for the CBA. All this speculation is moot at this point because we don't know what kind of system will be in place or what the salary cap number is. I would love for Will to come back as he would be perfect off the bench as he can play multiple positions but he would cut in 2012 cap room and I don't see the Knicks cutting into 2012 cap room.

[boyz2knicks]

hoping we get chandler back. i really see him as the type of player who has no ego and willing to take a paycut to play for the knicks. if we can get him back, then i think we won the trade. and forget chris paul, i rather strengthen the frontcourt like most champions are and live with billups as the pg.

[Falstaffxx]

hoping we get chandler back. i really see him as the type of player who has no ego and willing to take a paycut to play for the knicks. if we can get him back, then i think we won the trade. and forget chris paul, i rather strengthen the frontcourt like most champions are and live with billups as the pg.

I think "strengthen the frontcourt" is a good idea, but if we're doing that instead of pursuing Paul, Chandler wouldn't be someone I'd pursue toward that end. He would make a nice 6th-man for us, but he doesn't bring the attributes you normally look for when you're talking about "strengthening the front court." He can cover some 4's, but that's a stretch position for him, and he obviously can't cover centers or put up big rebounding numbers (career high 5.9 per game, with starter minutes). His shot-blocking has been nice, though.

So if we're looking to add a good scoring 6th man who is a versatile defender, then he makes sense. But I don't think he makes sense if the goal is to "strengthen the front court."

[boyz2knicks]

hoping we get chandler back. i really see him as the type of player who has no ego and willing to take a paycut to play for the knicks. if we can get him back, then i think we won the trade. and forget chris paul, i rather strengthen the frontcourt like most champions are and live with billups as the pg.

I think "strengthen the frontcourt" is a good idea, but if we're doing that instead of pursuing Paul, Chandler wouldn't be someone I'd pursue toward that end. He would make a nice 6th-man for us, but he doesn't bring the attributes you normally look for when you're talking about "strengthening the front court." He can cover some 4's, but that's a stretch position for him, and he obviously can't cover centers or put up big rebounding numbers (career high 5.9 per game, with starter minutes). His shot-blocking has been nice, though.

So if we're looking to add a good scoring 6th man who is a versatile defender, then he makes sense. But I don't think he makes sense if the goal is to "strengthen the front court."

if we get a center, then theres still left for chandler. if we get paul, theres none left for chandler and a starting center. and i dont know why we still need paul, we are already at the point where its the players who wants to play with us rather than us wanting them. lots of players will be willing to take a paycut for us so we will be getting alot of good players. and if we get paul, well close that cap space and thus have no chance of signing other good players.

[GONYK]

hoping we get chandler back. i really see him as the type of player who has no ego and willing to take a paycut to play for the knicks. if we can get him back, then i think we won the trade. and forget chris paul, i rather strengthen the frontcourt like most champions are and live with billups as the pg.

I think "strengthen the frontcourt" is a good idea, but if we're doing that instead of pursuing Paul, Chandler wouldn't be someone I'd pursue toward that end. He would make a nice 6th-man for us, but he doesn't bring the attributes you normally look for when you're talking about "strengthening the front court." He can cover some 4's, but that's a stretch position for him, and he obviously can't cover centers or put up big rebounding numbers (career high 5.9 per game, with starter minutes). His shot-blocking has been nice, though.

So if we're looking to add a good scoring 6th man who is a versatile defender, then he makes sense. But I don't think he makes sense if the goal is to "strengthen the front court."

if we get a center, then theres still left for chandler. if we get paul, theres none left for chandler and a starting center. and i dont know why we still need paul, we are already at the point where its the players who wants to play with us rather than us wanting them. lots of players will be willing to take a paycut for us so we will be getting alot of good players. and if we get paul, well close that cap space and thus have no chance of signing other good players.

Maybe because Paul is one of those players who wants to play for us, is the best PG in the league, makes everyone around him better, and would make this team a clear cut contender?

What we don't need is to be wasting big money on big men when all we need from them is to rebound, defend, and stay out of the way on offense. Chris Paul made Aaron Gray seem like a legit NBA player.

[boyz2knicks]

Maybe because Paul is one of those players who wants to play for us, is the best PG in the league, makes everyone around him better, and would make this team a clear cut contender?

What we don't need is to be wasting big money on big men when all we need from them is to rebound, defend, and stay out of the way on offense. Chris Paul made Aaron Gray seem like a legit NBA player.

i dont care about him being the best pg in the league. hes position is not so important. billups is enough. and i dont want these superteams. the league would be boring with these superteams.

[GONYK]

Maybe because Paul is one of those players who wants to play for us, is the best PG in the league, makes everyone around him better, and would make this team a clear cut contender?

What we don't need is to be wasting big money on big men when all we need from them is to rebound, defend, and stay out of the way on offense. Chris Paul made Aaron Gray seem like a legit NBA player.

i dont care about him being the best pg in the league. hes position is not so important. billups is enough. and i dont want these superteams. the league would be boring with these superteams.

PG is probably the most important position on the floor, especially when we have the offensive players that we do. CP3 would make them so much more efficient it would be scary.

Billups is not enough. He was never that great of a distributor and was never on Paul's level in his prime, let alone now. Whether you like superteams or not is irrelevant. I don't like superteams either, but you know what I do like? Winning championships, and CP3 is our best shot to do that.

On top of that, the Knicks management wants a third star, and if CP3 looks to make good on his toast, we will have a superteam. Feel free to stop watching if that happens.

[boyz2knicks]

PG is probably the most important position on the floor, especially when we have the offensive players that we do. CP3 would make them so much more efficient it would be scary.

Billups is not enough. He was never that great of a distributor and was never on Paul's level in his prime, let alone now. Whether you like superteams or not is irrelevant. I don't like superteams either, but you know what I do like? Winning championships, and CP3 is our best shot to do that.

On top of that, the Knicks management wants a third star, and if CP3 looks to make good on his toast, we will have a superteam. Feel free to stop watching if that happens.

if pg is the most important position then how come they havent won the last 20 years. players like billups, fisher, young rondo are enough to win it all.

[GONYK]

PG is probably the most important position on the floor, especially when we have the offensive players that we do. CP3 would make them so much more efficient it would be scary.

Billups is not enough. He was never that great of a distributor and was never on Paul's level in his prime, let alone now. Whether you like superteams or not is irrelevant. I don't like superteams either, but you know what I do like? Winning championships, and CP3 is our best shot to do that.

On top of that, the Knicks management wants a third star, and if CP3 looks to make good on his toast, we will have a superteam. Feel free to stop watching if that happens.

if pg is the most important position then how come they havent won the last 20 years. players like billups, fisher, young rondo are enough to win it all.

Billups played for one of the most dominant defensive teams ever, and even so, if the Lakers had their sh*t together, they could have beaten Detroit. Either way, it's irrelevant, because we don't play that type of defense.

Fisher played in the Triangle Offense, which is pretty much the only offense you don't need a great PG for. The only problem is, you need the best and smartest player in the league on the wing, and big men who are very good passers out of either the high or low post. You also need Phil Jackson.

Rondo, in case you hadn't noticed, won it all with 3 Hall of Famers AKA a Superteam.

So really, PG is extremely important, and I can't see any non-Triangle Offense team winning it all without a top-notch distributor.

[boyz2knicks]

PG is probably the most important position on the floor, especially when we have the offensive players that we do. CP3 would make them so much more efficient it would be scary.

Billups is not enough. He was never that great of a distributor and was never on Paul's level in his prime, let alone now. Whether you like superteams or not is irrelevant. I don't like superteams either, but you know what I do like? Winning championships, and CP3 is our best shot to do that.

On top of that, the Knicks management wants a third star, and if CP3 looks to make good on his toast, we will have a superteam. Feel free to stop watching if that happens.

if pg is the most important position then how come they havent won the last 20 years. players like billups, fisher, young rondo are enough to win it all.

Billups played for one of the most dominant defensive teams ever, and even so, if the Lakers had their sh*t together, they could have beaten Detroit. Either way, it's irrelevant, because we don't play that type of defense.

Fisher played in the Triangle Offense, which is pretty much the only offense you don't need a great PG for. The only problem is, you need the best and smartest player in the league on the wing, and big men who are very good passers out of either the high or low post. You also need Phil Jackson.

Rondo, in case you hadn't noticed, won it all with 3 Hall of Famers AKA a Superteam.

So really, PG is extremely important, and I can't see any non-Triangle Offense team winning it all without a top-notch distributor.

if shumpert can turn out to be ok, him and billups would already be good. if you combine the big 3 stats of boston, they all are around 19ppg each or 57 ppg while amare and melo who are just hitting their primes can be expected to contribute 25 ppg each or 50 ppg plus around 15 for chauncey, then we are at 65, we are much higher than boston and so even if without a pg, our offense is still good plus dantoni known for improving pgs, if billups could average around 7 plus shumpert then ill be good with it. those extra cap space imo should be for flexibility so we could change lineups if nothing is working but if we get cp3 and it fails, we will be stuck with that lineup for a long time.

[Falstaffxx]

I don't think the issue here is "is Billups enough?" I think the issue is that if you're going to get supporting pieces instead of holding out for Paul, Deron, or Dwight, why would you start by devoting significant cap space to Chandler to be a backup 3 and situational backup 2 and 4? We've got Shumpert who the team is obviously expecting to be able to get minutes at the 1, 2, and 3, and we have the opportunity to bring Shawne Williams back cheaply as a backup 3/4. If we are going to spend money now, Dalembert would be a better use of money than Chandler.

[siar617]

I thought this was about Shumpert. How did we get on CP3?
Anyway I think Iman will be not only good short term but great when we get CP3.
Having two play makers and two finishers in the starting line up is going to make us unstoppable. Just need a center that fits

[GONYK]

I thought this was about Shumpert. How did we get on CP3?
Anyway I think Iman will be not only good short term but great when we get CP3.
Having two play makers and two finishers in the starting line up is going to make us unstoppable. Just need a center that fits

There is a good chance Shump will be gone when CP3 gets here.

[siar617]

I thought this was about Shumpert. How did we get on CP3?
Anyway I think Iman will be not only good short term but great when we get CP3.
Having two play makers and two finishers in the starting line up is going to make us unstoppable. Just need a center that fits

There is a good chance Shump will be gone when CP3 gets here.

Why do people keep saying that? He was a bad pick but NO takes him for what reason?

[GONYK]

I thought this was about Shumpert. How did we get on CP3?
Anyway I think Iman will be not only good short term but great when we get CP3.
Having two play makers and two finishers in the starting line up is going to make us unstoppable. Just need a center that fits

There is a good chance Shump will be gone when CP3 gets here.

Why do people keep saying that? He was a bad pick but NO takes him for what reason?

Shump was not a bad pick at all. I'm saying that, because if we have to trade for CP3, what other assets do we have?