Sheridan’s Piece; Walsh Unwilling to Move Marbury?

by Chris Alvino on February 17th, 2009 at 5:38 pm

First off, the comments in the last couple of days have been great regarding the trading season. Good stuff.

Someone brought up ESPN.com’s Chris Sheridan in an earlier comment. If you have not read it, then do it now (or after you finish reading my post). Sheridan, who I am convinced is a Knick fan, talks about Commissioner Stern’s “bomb” that the payroll will not increase in two years. Sheridan points out that even without resigning Lee and Nate, the Knicks still might not be able to sign two free agents to max deals in 2010. Essentially, Sheridan points out that Curry’s contract might be the absolute killer (nothing new there).

If Curry’s contract cannot be moved, then so be it. LeBron James is the key to that off-season. Two big free agents would be great, but LeBron is the absolute key. Would I be completely against signing James in 2010 and then signing another superstar in 2011 when Curry and Jeffries come off the books? I have not looked at the free agents available that off-season, but I am sure that there has to be someone who can be had. Why deal Lee, and to a lesser extent Nate, if there is no guarantee that we will be able to sign two big free agents in 2010?

Also, another commenter (KnicksFanInPlano) led me to a link from the Sacramento Bee that talked about interest from the Knicks for either Miller and/or John Salmons . via the Bee:

“The interest in the center remains lukewarm leaguewide, but sources said he remains on New York’s radar. The Knicks have indicated that they are interested in Miller or swingman John Salmons, with the potential players coming to Sacramento including Malik Rose ($7.6 million expiring contract), Nate Robinson ($2 million expiring contract) and Jerome James ($6.2 million this season, player option for $6.6 million next). New York also is believed to have told the Kings it has no intention of trading exiled guard Stephon Marbury and his $20.8 million expiring contract.”

First of all, how can we not deal Marbury if we can get a legit starter for him that will not ruin our long-term plan? Plenty of people will say that the Knicks should simply let the contract expire and open up a roster space for next year. As far as I am concerned, that would be the only reason not to deal Marbury. If the Knicks would like to add another young player to the mix, then they might be better off with the open roster spot. As of right now, the Knicks should have 4 open roster spaces for next year in Marbury, Rose, Roberson, and Mobley.  If Jerome James retires, that is five.

I truly believe that Dolan has to be a spender in this market.  It is not my money, but I trust that Donnie knows what he is doing and that he can turn Dolan’s money into value.  If the Knicks can get Bobby Jackson and Miller for Marbury, that has to be done!

As far as John Salmons goes, I think that he can be a real player in the D’Antoni system.  He reminds me a bit of Raja Bell.  However, there have been reports about Salmons’ poor attitude.  That attitude might have to do with his uncertain future, or it might simply be that he is a troublemaker.  I have never met him, so I cannot tell you that.  I can, however, attest to his talent.  He is a good scoring two guard that has a good all-around game.  His salary extends into 2010, but at a fairly low rate.  If Walsh can somehow ship Jeffries in that deal, I would make it happen.  Chad Ford said today in his chat that the Knicks insist on the Kings taking on Jeffries and the Kings want Nate Robinson.  To me, the question becomes whether or not you would deal John Salmons for Nate Robinson?  If so, then throw Jeffries and Mikki Moore into the equation and get the deal done.

About Chris Alvino

Chris Alvino grew up in Crestwood, NY. He graduated from Regis High School in 2005. There he played both basketball and baseball. Chris is currently a student at Boston College, where he practices with the varsity Women's Basketball Team (... seriously). Chris has been a Knicks' fan for years and can literally talk about them all day long, every day of the week. Chris enjoys writing on this blog and seeing what everyone out there has to say about it. View all posts by Chris Alvino →
  • belikmike23

    I’ve always like Salmons ever since his days with the Sixers, so I would love to have him on this team. I am against trading Nate though, because I feel his explosiveness and the excitement he brings to the team is impossible to replace, so I am all for finding ways around trading Nate away.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    I lied – I still read your posts, Chris. And I have a question: Why do you insist on targeting scorers at the deadline? Donnie Walsh has already articulated what he views as this team’s needs: A shot blocking big man, a shooting guard that can knock down 3′s, and a ball handler to help out Duhon.

    If Brad Miller is this team’s starting C for the next year and a half, then you better tell me that we are spinning DLee for a defensive-minded forward to play the PF spot alongside Miller.

    Miller and DLee in the front court is not a recipe for success. At the end of the day, it doesn’t all boil down to the salary cap. This team has to at least look competitive going into next offseason. Adding a guy like Miller could sabotage us in 2010, regardless of when his deal expires.

  • Chris Alvino

    gozer- You make a good point.

    But if there is a shot-blocking center that is readily available and that is worthy of starting on this team, then I’ll take him instead. If Marcus Camby can be had for an expiring contract, then I would absolutely take Camby over Miller.

    Trading for Miller would help this team more that it would hurt this team. From that perspective, I say go get him. From another perspective, there are not many better options out there.

    gozer, you are right on our team needs. I believe they are our needs as well. However, Donnie has to play the hands that he is dealt. If I can think of another readily available shot-blocker whose contract expires after next season, then I will suggest him.

  • http://www.thiswebsiteissoawesome.com/ The Frankman

    Right now Walsh/D’Antoni’s refusal to send Marbury to a playoff team is killing the Knicks. I’d think at least 1-2 teams could be convinced to take him in a trade.

  • EQ1217

    Walsh/D’antoni would love to trade Marbury, Dolan on the other hand…

  • Chris Alvino

    You might be right on that. With the money that he has thrown around over the last few years, I hope that now is not the time when he becomes prudent.

  • EQ1217

    I have a hard time beleiving the Knicks cant trade Marbury. Maybe the economy has affected MSG as well or maybe Dolan is so vindictive that he doesn’t care as long as he gets his way.

  • Mucha

    If the Knicks CAN get John Salmons from Sacramento – I just read an article about it but I’m not saying that it’s true though – we could then deal him to Portland for Bayless. We’re overcrowded at the 3 spot but the Blazers are looking for another quality shooting forward.

  • Chris Alvino

    Mucha- I think that if we get Salmons, we would keep him. You don’t have a bad idea, but I think he stays here.

    I think an ideal trade for us would send Marbury and Jeffries to Sacramento for Kenny Thomas, Brad Miller, and John Salmons. I would even throw in the second round pick we got from Denver (Balkman deal).

    We get a true center and a true shooting guard that can defend and hit the open three. Sacramento gets a lot of cap relief and finally gets to ditch that Kenny Thomas contract. We can throw in Anthony Roberson to make the numbers work better.

  • Mucha

    Why would the Knicks keep Salmons, we already got Gallinari, Chandler and Harrington. And he’s not young enough.

    Nate Robinson is a special player, we have to deal him for another young talent and Bayless could fit that description. Robinson IS special, I can’t understand why many people are sleeping on that. I wan’t none of that Hilton Armstrong BS, no disrespect Tommy. The Knicks should resign him if they can’t make a proper deal happen.

  • Qaspec

    With the Thunder trading for Chandler their most glaring need is power forward. Sounds like they could be a suitor for David Lee. They have 10 million in cap space and 3 first round draft picks.

    Maybe the Knicks could work a sign and trade – Lee gets his 10 million (Larry Bird exception – 3 years competed) and goes to the Thunder for Watson (expires 2010) and Robert Swift (Expires 2009) and the middle pick out of OKC’s 3 first round picks (if Walsh is really good we get the best pick).

    Watson could play well for Dantoni and Swift is 7”1 young, blocks shots and rebounds (project his stats from this year to just 28.8 minutes a game and he averages 1.65 blocks and 8.2 rebounds a game). The real value is adding another 1st round pick. That would give the Knicks 2 first round picks, at least 1 in the lottery. They could use the picks to package in a trade possibly enticing a team to take on Curry or Jeffries.

    Maybe OKC would be willing to take Jeffries also for Atkins and Damien Wilikins. Both of those contracts expire in 2010. This would give Oklahoma depth off the bench and roster spaces for their draft picks. This would solve the shrinking cap problem for the Knicks and provide more bodies at postions we need to fill. Just a thought.

    Knicks
    Starters
    C – Robert Swift
    PF – Al Harrington
    SF – Danilo Gallinari
    SG – Nate Robinson
    PG – Chris Duhon

    Bench
    PG – Earl Watson
    SG – Quentin Richardson
    SF – Wilson Chandler
    PF – Tim Thomas
    C – Eddy Curry
    C/PF – OKC First Round Pick
    SG/PG – NYC First Round Pick

    Disabled List
    PG – Chucky Atkins
    SG – Anthony Roberson
    SF – Damien Wilkins

    Maybe it seems like we’re not as competitive in 09 without Lee and Jeffries but it gives the team multiple expiring 09 contracts, additional young players with trade value and more cap space for 2010. Those ingredients land you superstars in trades.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    You can’t be sure that Miller helps more than hurts. You’re assuming that and you’re taking a gamble. In my mind, it’s not worth the risk. Listen, you might be right. Miller might be great in this offense. I think it’s lunacy to pin our hopes on that guy.

    But at least we agree on Camby.

  • Qaspec

    Mucha, I don’t think anybody is sleeping on Nate Robinson. He is a talented scorer, but his game has weaknesses also. Teams are going to be weary in trading for an under 6 foot shooting guard who struggles to defend (especially against post up SG’s) and likes to showboat and go 1on1 alot.

    Please remember also, that Dantoni’s system pads the stats for the team he coaches. Gm’s take that into account. As a fan we see. “wow, Nate’s averaging 16 points off the bench and had 30 the other night!”, other GM’s think well in our system that’s probably only 9 or 10 points a game”.

    I would love, LOVE to see Nate here as a sparkplug bench guy after 2010 also, but not at the expense if resigning him eliminates our chances to sign 2 superstar players when 2010 comes around.

  • BiggieSmalls

    this is a smart plan.. Im just wary that D Lee and his model girlfriend would commit to OKC long term

    I think DW can get 2 #1s from OKC at this point if Dlee signs off.

    The Nets are the big wildcard if they pawn off VC on any of the multiple suitors he has. NJ would have gobs of cap space this year and Devin Harris to run the PnR and a good young Center to compliment D Lee.

  • Mucha

    I know, and that’s why I’ve always been talking about trading him. My only point was the fact that we can’t afford to trade him for useless players or late first round draft picks.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    I still don’t understand the rationale. It seems that you’re refusing to acknowledge the possibility that he gets an offer in the summertime that we can’t afford to match. You can hope that, at that point, we can work out a sign-and-trade, but there are no guarantees. Then we lose him for nothing and you’ll miss those “useless” players and picks.