SNY.tvBLOG NETWORKSCHEDULESTATSSTANDINGS VIDEO Headlines:

Tommy Dee

Donnie asked for Camby
By Tommy Dee - Nov 23, 2008 8:34 pm

Lisa Dillman of the LA Times noted today that the Knicks demanded Marcus Camby at first and were rejected, before settling on the combination of Tim Thomas and Cuttino Mobley.

“…Trade talks stalled early this week when the Knicks wanted Marcus Camby. The Clippers made a final offer, and the salary cap-clearing Knicks (preparing for the future, namely, the LeBron James sweepstakes in 2010) completed their second deal of the day, having also acquired disgruntled forward Al Harrington from the Warriors…”

This should set Knick fans’ hearts at ease that Donnie Walsh did request the former Knick fan favorite, before realizing now was the time to dump Randolph’s salary. It makes sense as the team is desperate for shot blocking, but Mike Dunleavy clearly knew had he included Camby he would have never lived it down. From a PR standpoint it would have been a one-sided deal.

Donnie did his due diligence, but ended up making the right deal anyway. Camby would have been a Grand Slam instead of a home run.

RSS feed | Trackback URI

7 Comments »

Comment by Chris Alvino
2008-11-23 21:28:29

I was complaining that we didn’t get Camby back. But at least I know that Donnie tried. He knows what he is doing, and this proves that.

Getting Camby in return for Zach would have been great.

 
Comment by aearp1
2008-11-23 23:46:16

I wish you were on longer tonight on the radio!!!

 
Comment by BluEandOrange
2008-11-23 23:52:47

Now all the Knicks have to do is purge themselves of Marbury, James, Jeffries, Curry, Rose, and we can move on from the Isiah debacle. Heck, why not rid the team of Roberson while you’re at it?

PG Duhon
SG Mobley
SF Chandler
PF Thomas
C Harrington

6th Robinson
Lee
Richardson (I find it hard to start Thomas over Q-Rich but someone has got to give)
Ewing Jr. (sign him if he’s available)

Now look, there is the nine man rotation that D’Antoni needs.
- Shuffle in Q-Rich as the swingman to relieve Mobley and Chandler
- Nate Robinson will play the backup PG
- David Lee will come off the bench as the primary reserve PF, center
- Ewing Jr. will be the contingency plan just in case Harrington and Lee get in foul trouble
- The Knicks can even go with a lineup with PG Q-Rich, SG Mobley, SF Chandler, PF Thomas, and Center Harrington for some spontaneity.

I hope the Knicks do not tank this season. Where is Don Chaney when you need him?

Comment by Chris Alvino
2008-11-24 00:20:12

There is no shot that Duhon gets taken out of the starting lineup. He will start every game this year and probably next year at the point.

Comment by BluEandOrange
2008-11-24 07:49:30

You assumed that I said Duhon would not start. Nowhere in “The Knicks can even go with a lineup with PG Q-Rich, SG Mobley, SF Chandler, PF Thomas, and Center Harrington for some spontaneity” does it say that.

Let me clarify. When I said “go with a lineup”, I meant after the first group started.

 
 
Comment by LosingIsiah
2008-11-24 15:15:06

Personally,

I rather do:

PG Duhon
SG Q Rich
SF Chandler
PF Thomas
C Harrington

Have Nate, Mobley, Lee and Rose coming off the bench…

And Yes I bring back Pat Jr..

I would go with Q because he can really pound those SG in the league with his size.. also he has the ability to hit shots more consistently that Mobley…

 
 
Comment by Chris Alvino
2008-11-24 00:19:11

I personally do not see Tim Thomas in the starting five. His length might be too valuable off of our bench to backup at center.

I would look for Mobley and Harrington in the starting five, with Thomas playing 15-20 minutes off the bench.

Once Jeffries gets back, those minutes might drop. But Lee figures to play even more minutes without Zach here. Thomas won’t eat into his minutes.

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.