100 Games Under

While they are both very flawed players, I would keep Nate over Lee. DLee needs to play with a center that does everything like Howard, Duncan or even Brook Lopez and I don’t see the Knicks being close to getting the type of center. Lee does not have enough offense to work with a center like Delambert.

Another thing that needs to be considered is Gallo’s development, he will be a PF in this league and the type of offense he is capable of bringing and he can allow the Knicks to get a Delambert type player.

Nate is a good 6 man of the bench for 25-30 minutes and instant offense of the bench is always important.

I completely disagree with everything besides the concept that Nate > Lee. If Lee was next to a center who does everything, what would HE do? All he does for us right now is rebound, which is the only reason he has accumulated any value. If Dwight was our center, you think Lee could be a good four? He would be forced to stand around on the wing, where he is useless. He doesn’t have a jump shot like Rashard does.

It makes no sense for the knicks to try to find a big, Dalembert-type, center. You think D’Antoni wants to get a big fat guy who wobbles around the paint and can’t run the floor or shoot the ball? those players are strictly for half-court teams, of which we are the polar opposite. A big, slow center taking up the middle with a confused David Lee at the four (on the wing)… that sounds like the worst possible lineup a D’Antoni team could ever wish for.

I do agree (or hope) that gallo will eventually play the four. That can be a deadly weapon in a system like this, but he needs to beef up… a lot. Who knows what his deal is at this point.

In fairness, Lee finishes around the rim with both hands as well as anyone. He’s playing hurt right now so let’s not pound on him too much. He was ridiculous for the better part of the season.

He has mid range and can be the mid post if there were a big body, but I don’t know how well that meshes in the system.

The Bobcats had to make a decision with Jason Richardson and Emeka Okafor (they had to do it in the same summer if I’m not mistaken), that comparison could be more accurate. And having Cook/Beasley or Ellis/Randolph would be a hundred times better for this franchise.

But like you said Lee and Robinson are not responsible for a lot of these losses, but (like you said again) there’s a fact, they haven’t been able to make it better even when they had a chance and the playing time to do it.

If Donnie Walsh really wants to keep David Lee, the fact that he’s not putting up big numbers anymore could be a blessing in disguise. But I wanted Walsh to trade him – because dumping Randolph for Lee and Robinson makes no sense in my opinion – and he had to do it before the trade deadline because he’ll lose a lot of leverage in a sign-and-trade deal.

Positive :

- Good finisher with both hands.
- His midrange jumpshot is improving:
- Very good rebounder.
- Good passer.

Negative :

- Horrible and conceited defender.
- Poor decision-making.
- Still a poor jump-shooter.

I think the bad outweighs the good. And he’s really irritating at times and he takes a lot of stupid decisions – he’s not better than Nate Robinson from that standpoint IMO. He went one on five against the Kings thinking he was Larry Bird or something, comitted a turnover and had the nerve to turn to the referees. That was just ridiculous. His hands were freezing against the Cavaliers, I don’t care if he was hurt but he had the nerve to take a 20-foot jumper with a hand in his face in the fourth quarter. If you’re hurt, don’t try to do something you can’t do, especially when you’re in a tight game.

He didn’t simply dump Randolph for Lee and Robinson; It was more about getting rid of the terrible contract, knowing that he wasn’t going to be a player of our future. It was worth it to take a shot with Lee and Nate because they barely get paid and have a lot of potential. Why not see if either of them is worth keeping? As DW keeps saying: It’s all about flexibility. In this case, flexibility was more important than the extra wins Randolph might have gotten for us. I understood that concept coming into the season.

DW obviously knew we would get more value out of Lee by trading him before the deadline. (unless he wants to keep Lee, which i don’t believe he does) Maybe, we just didn’t get a good enough offer. It’s possible (likely) that we had several trade talks about Lee, but that nothing good enough was on the table.

Yes I understand that, I really like the fact that we’ll have some flexibility and dumping Randolph was obviously a great move. But at the end of the day, if he decides to keep Lee and Robinson for the same amount of money then it didn’t make sense. I guess he’s not dumb enough not to understand that, that’s why his passivity around the deadline surprised me.

I don’t know, the fact that Donnie Walsh took him out of the market a week before the trade deadline (unless somebody was willing to take Curry – which is a joke) could NOT be a good move. I really don’t know what Donnie Walsh was expecting, insiders talked about a promising young player and a draft pick. Of course that is too much, especially for a RFA.

But would you really think its worth it to trade him if we couldn’t even get rid of curry/jeffries?

If i was (insert any other team), i wouldn’t be willing to part with a promising young talent just to get David Lee.

Imagine if Lee was an everyday power forward? He is one of the best rebounders in the game right now. No one can deny that.

He is one of the most brutal defenders in the entire league, but let’s face it, he has a tough match-up seemingly every night.

Lee’s poor play might have exposed him a bit though to the rest of the league. He might be playing himself out of the 10 million dollar price range.

I love Lee, but as much as he says he wants to be here, I will believe that when I see how he handles the negotiations this summer. If he tries to handicap this franchise, then I am beginning to believe that this team can simply let him walk.

Make no mistake, Lee is no Amare. He is no Boozer. He is no Bosh. He is no Garnett.

The cap on him might be around 5 years and 43 million for Lee. Much more than that, I think Donnie will be exploring some trade options. I am not convinced that Donnie is in love with Lee. Walsh has been around the game for a long time. He has seen fierce rebounding forwards before, and he has a good feel on the type of player that Lee is. Walsh will not overpay for Lee.

I think it would have been worth it without Jeffries or Curry because if you dump Lee for a rookie contract you basically save 5 millions.

If I was another GM, “I wouldn’t be willing to part with a promising young talent just to get David Lee” neither. But his name wasn’t hot for nothing. Maybe the Knicks could have gotten Bayless since the Blazers were overcrowded in the backcourt (Blake, Rodriguez, Roy, Fernandez) and looking for another inside player. Don Nelson asked Anthony Randolph to talk to his agent and explore trade possibilities in november or something, I wanted Donnie Walsh to pull another Dale Davis for Jermaine O’Neal trade because the door was open.

5 years 43 millions is really too much IMO Chris. 7 or 7.5 millions per year is the ceiling, at least it should be.

I’m not sure why we are spending so much time comparing two role players. They both have useful qualities and could play on a championship quality team as long as they came “off the bench”. Maybe Lee could crack the starting line up if we had a very good center because he is a fairly efficient scorer around the basket, but he’s still overrated because of the system we have (faster pace = more possessions = more points and rebounds per 36 minutes/game) and the fact that he can’t play defense worth a lick.

The problem is that because they are two of our best players (remember we suck) they are also pretty popular. It’s going to be hard to move both because the average fan likes these guys. However, it would be suicidal to pay 8-10 million to keep either one. To build a championship caliber team you need 3 legitimate high level starters. When you are paying big dollars to role players or the 4th/5th man, there is no room to pay 3 legitimate high level players and stay beneath the cap.

If the market for Lee and Robinson is inflated, the smartest thing we could do is trade both with bad contracts or for picks while their values are inflated.

“If the market for Lee and Robinson is inflated, the smartest thing we could do is trade both with bad contracts or for picks while their values are inflated.”

Oh, and by the way, that’s obviously what I think Walsh will do! He’s too smart to overpay for role players. Perhaps so is the rest of the league. Then the point becomes moot because we can resign lee for 6M and Nate for 4-5M and still have room for legitimate starters in time.

We should just let DW do hat he feels is right cause he has atleast set us up to be under the cap for the first time in a decade