ESPN: Knicks Are a Team in Turmoil

ESPN and Yahoo Sports mislead fans and to me are just determined to embarrass NY Sports period.

ESPN.com is retarded. The Knicks aren’t in any turmoil and the Clippers got 8 points for biggest turnaround and was tied for 4th in the antithetical category “Team Turmoil.”

It will be funny to see their predictions of where Lebron and the other free agents will end up which come out on Monday. Like they know anymore than Tommy, Ben, Alvino, Myself, or any of the commenters on this website about where these guys will end up. Guarantee a large majority predicts Lebron stays in Cleveland, Wade stays in Miami, and the Knicks come out empty.

Myles I Agree . How do those guys receive the title “Expert” anyways?

I don’t understand how Nate Robinson and David Lee not being signed contribute to us being a “team in turmoil.” If anything, it shows the new regime’s competence and patience. We’re probably gonna keep both of them on cheap 1-year contracts.

As for the shrinking salary cap, is that even official yet? Or is it just speculation? Either way it still doesn’t affect us THAT much. If we’re able to trade Jeffries and/or Curry, we’ll be golden. If not, we still have enough room to sign Lebron.

WE have a team without any talent(unless you count knicks fans assesments of wilson chandler and jordan hill)and no draft pick next year ,no prospects for this year ,lee n robinson still not signed and you are asking “why are we team turmoil?”

BOB: should we go back a few years to the good old days when we had a record breaking payrolls and we were humming like a well oiled machine. Where is the constructive part of your criticism???

Bob as an advocate of the strategy that involved signing whatever becomes available. If a decent to good player becomes available and the knicks don’t aqcuire him, we failed.

Although, we are, of course, in turmoil, but at least there is direction and flexibility now; this is the start of something new. Very different from the turmoil we were in a few years ago, or even last year.

that has nothing to do with their reasoning. They’re saying Walsh is torn between spending now and spending later, yet the reality is quite the opposite. Walsh is clearly focused on 2010.

Sorry fellas, but ESPN has hit it right on the head.

First, Donnie Walsh is about as firmly committed to the so-called 2010 plan as his contract offers to Jason Kidd and Grant Hill demonstrated. The Jason Kidd contract would have caused considerable problems with the cap space numbers as you will see below. Walsh has clearly demonstrated he is torn between spending now and what he is looking at come July 1, 2010.

Second, how many teams would have both of their free agent signings hanging out there this close to training camp?

Third, the experts (not the journalists) are projecting the cap to decrease to around $50-51 million. After the Knicks give a max contract (which they must do for a franchise player) they will not have the use of any cap exceptions (except minimum contracts) to sign the remaining players. Do you know how many players they will have under contract after the max contract is signed if they can’t sign either of their free agents now? 9 players. Assuming the cap is at $50 million and the salaries (w/o considering cap holds or exceptions that will probably be renounced to stay under the cap), that would leave about 12 million to get three players (roster must be at 12) with Lee and Nate still not on the roster. (If Lee got a two year contract now then that number would be about 4 million for two players).

The Knicks can’t address the immediate team needs because they won’t have the cash to really build a team next year, except to try to get a marquee player willing to come into a rebuilding situation. What three players do they get for $12 million? Not to mention, what do they get in return for their homegrown talent?

ESPN is absolutely correct that the Knicks have been making half-ass efforts to sign players. Sure, its for the so-called plan, but the embarrassment you blame on ESPN is the present condition of the Knicks, not some future plan likely to fall flat because expectations have been oversold. If the Knicks play like the worst team in the east again, that’s not ESPN’s fault.

Fans have the right to hope, but you guys should really look at the numbers and you’ll see what every other person paying attention to cap (including Donnie Walsh) sees. There are other options, but they are not looking good with little help from ESPN.

What bothers me, if anything, about Walsh’s approach is his reluctance to give Sessions a multiyear deal when offers to Kidd and Hill were along those parameters. The reason this bother’s me is because while Sessions isnt an Allstar he was dubbed by one ESPN “expert” as the most under rated player IN THE LEAGUE in a recent article.

Now I’m not too familiar with Sessions but D’an and Walsh both speak highly of his potential, and he’s named the most under-rated player in the league by a columnist. Now, lets assume hes somewhere in between those two assessments. Sounds like hes WORTHY of a multiyear deal to me! If signing Kidd to the mid- level past 2010 wouldnt hurt our LBJ money why is the idea of Sessions taking that money so risky!? We should sign Sessions and let Nate loose! Clearly Nate isnt in our plans!

Yes, trading Jeffries and Curry can be a help, but not if Walsh continues to trade for players like Hughes and Harrington. And that assumes that good trades are possible.

easy answer: sessions is unproven, kidd and hill are both proven players and leaders

You’re clearly missing the point. Walsh’s unwillingness(that a word?) to sign Lee and Nate IS a testament to his commitment to 2010. The same with the Ramon Sessions situation. Sessions is unproven, Hill and Kidd are both proven players who are LEADERS. Sessions is a guy who hasn’t done enough to earn a long contract. Consistently loses, can’t shoot. Everything about Sessions is based on potential, and potential doesn’t merit long term contracts. Walsh knows that.

About the Knicks not having the room to sign players, I guarantee you that’s not a problem. Walsh will acquire at least one pick in the draft next year and 12 milion is more than enough to sign 3 players. Also, the salary cap predictions of dropping by 10 million is extremely pessimistic. Niether you or me know if the economy will get better by 2010.

Hughes and Harrington both had expiring contracts. The Knicks needed a shooting guard, and Harrington played like an all star when he came over.

I do not believe DW is reluctant. If, by waiting it out, we sign Sessions to a 3m for 2 years instead of MLE for 4 years and by waiting the LAC have signed their 4th PG and Milwaukee is so commited to its added players it lets Sessions walk, then DW is going to look like the GM of the year. Sure it could backfire, but at this late date I don’t know how. Patience is going to pay off. DW is not causing turmoil, he is playing the only hand he has. Lee and Robinson will be on board for one year deals. Flexibiility will rule. Now all we need to do is steal a Kevin Durant and Stephen Jackson will be forgotten.

Myles its obvious these guys don’t know what they are talking about. Why Humor them?

We have no reason to sign Sessions to a long-term deal. He hasn’t proven he deserves it, and no other team is offering him anything. Who cares what ESPN says? Since when did praise from ESPN equal experience and success in the league? It would be silly to sign an unproven player like Sessions to a long-term deal. That’s how you end up with guys like Jared Jeffries and Jerome James.

I’m pretty sure Grant Hill was only offered a 1-year deal. Jason Kidd would bring experience and leadership. Walsh had to offer him more than Sessions because other teams were after him. Sessions on the other hand has no other option but the Qualifying offer from Milwaukee (which would be stupid).

Bob,

I was thinking that maybe we could book you to do a positive thinking seminar tour.

Perhaps we could set it up so that your seminars coincide with the Knicks road games this up coming season.

When you go to Dunkin Donuts in the morning, do you ask the attendant to only fill your cup up, half way?

It’s not personal, it’s just that i’m slipping into a deep depression reading your comments all of the time.

Please, could someone loan me some double edged razor blades, i’m getting into a warm bath right now!

I agree KBT1615. The guys who are more brilliant and knowledgeable should stop humoring those of us who know nothing and talk to each other instead, while the rest of us respect differing viewpoints and discuss the facts instead of solely conjecture and dreams.

back to the point, I don’t know how you’re saying trading for Harrington and Hughes hurt our 2010 plans, when they were moves made because of 2010. Harrington is great for this system and Hughes is done after this year, might get traded at the deadline.

Bottom line is Walsh has been clear in his goals and meticulous in carrying them out. No way you can call the Knicks a team in turmoil in my opinion. Maybe if 2010 is a failure, but right now the Knicks know exactly what they want to do.

the funniest thing is they’re saying we’re in turmoil not because of 2010, but because of walsh’s apparent dilemma between spending now and spending on free agents then. They clearly have no idea what they’re talking about.

Different Viewpoint is bullcrap there is truth and false. R
Walsh traded for Hughes and Harrington more for their Expirings and to rid us of 2010 cap than their talents. Even though Harrington

*Even though Harrington was our best scorer last year.*

Mr. Miles, perhaps I am missing your point, but you seem to be ignoring the most critical points here.

“to sign Lee and Nate IS a testament to his commitment to 2010″ I have no idea what that means since he has not signed either one.

But if what you are implying is that his failure to sign any one of those three players is a sign of 2010 fortitude, then we can revisit that interpretation when the Lee and Robinson matters resolve themselves. But I will suggest to you that it takes two to enter into a mutually agreeable contract. Both players will eventually get multiyear contracts from somebody; Nate probably in mid-level range (currently around $5 mil) and Lee a little higher (around 7-8 million). Lee has clearly expressed his commitment to get paid his perceived value and Walsh claims he would give it to him if he found a suitable sign and trade which probably includes an expiring contract.

To be securely under the cap, the Knicks can’t afford both (about $15 mil combined). I am sure we agree on that.

Now common sense would tell you that in order to get another two players on the roster of their caliber (or preferably better), you will need at least $12 million. Disagree? Then look at the free agency pool for 2010 and tell me what 3 players you will bring to the Knicks to complement a franchise player for $12 million.

Also, I am not sure why I should take your guarantee unless you are sitting in the boardroom (or war room) with Mr. Walsh and his Salary Cap team. If that is the case, then end of discussion. How do you know the Knicks will get a first rounder? Is that the same source that told you we would get Stephon Curry in the draft,

Mr. Mills, I don’t think Harrington and Hughes hurt the 2010 plan, I think they are an unfortunate by-product of the plan. My issue with Harrington and Hughes has nothing to do with creation of cap space. Trading for them accomplished movement towards that goal and unfortunately not much else. Hughes is done. We disagree on the quality of Harrington’s play and I think D’Antoni moving him out of the starting rotation supports the view that Harrington is not all that great. He plays well in stretches which never include the end-game where he will often lose focus and concentration. My point there is what can we get for these two to help build an attractive roster for franchise players who want to win? Cap space and one marquee player are not enough.

Your bottom line is not supported by the facts. Walsh has tough decisions and has demonstrated a willingness to digress from the plan because he will have a difficult time attracting franchise altering talent with the collection of talent he has now. That is why he is putting so much responsibility on a player who has only had 412 minutes in the NBA and WIlson Chandler who is his best trade bait at this point.

I am glad for your certainty. We disagree.

hey myles,when it was reported that the knicks were definately gonna sign sessions,you were all for it! so dont give me this crap now that sessions doesnt deserve a long term contract

I’ll be gentler regarding your comment KBT1615 since the truth should be self-evident. Harrington was the best scorer on a 32 win team, but he was also taken out of the starting line-up because he rarely showed up in crunch time and he was becoming a black hole to rival Zach Randolph.

Regarding the Hughes trade, that was a financial wash. IT DID NOT CLEAR CAP SPACE. Hughes made $12.8 million this year; Jerome James and Tim Thomas made $12.2 million combined. Jerome James contract expires in 2009-2010.

The Knicks got Hughes out of the Bull’s doghouse to fill a talent need at guard. Cmon. If you’re going to call my opinion bullcrap, at least get your facts straight or make a point like a gentleman.

so you guys are saying we ARE talented?

we got a two guard that we needed and freed up some roster spots.

if the knicks wait until sessions IS proven,it’ll cost the knicks a boatload more than they are willing to pay now

name one other player ,beside ramon sessions,that i ever advocated signing

Definitely a discussion worthy article. Personally, I don’t put much stock in many of Espn’s experts. Kidd’s offer was solid because a player of his caliber cannot merit anything less; plus, he would’ve brought this team much needed leadership and a completely different edge. Sessions is the complete opposite: raw talent, potential, inexperience… in other words, insecurity. Should DW bet on him? When the time is right, yes. Once Lee’s situation is solved, once JJ is cleared of the books (I firmly believe he will be moved before the trade deadline, and I never rule out Curry talking a walk either, because like someone said above, we’ll definitely be golden, cap-wise of course).
The term turmoil is quite relative, specially since the argument is so simple and weak, because they forgot to add one thing: Donnie’s “reluctance”, “internal debate” (or whaterver you might call it), to spend on Sessions has all its answers in the Jeffrie’s issue. Once JJ is gone, it’s likely that RS will come to NY. It’s normal having DW being endlessly patient, because he went after big fish that were worth it (Kidd and Hill). But after that didn’t work, the answer then became to sticking to his guns and original plan, clear more space and then, only then, move in on your next target.
Maybe the “turmoil” is externally seen because the two players that most impressed for NY last season are still without a contract, but everyone here knows why they’re both still in limbo: one began asking for ridiculous amounts of money (and has been brought down since, patiently); and the other hasn’t really proven that he is mentally ready to get down to business, be an asset, and contribute to DW’s and Coach D’s plans. So, yeah, that might be considered turmoil, but we see it as something completely understandable.
Maybe the espn’s “oracles” didn’t take into consideration those factors before writing what they did. Who knows.
Great discussion, though.

That’s better, but certainly very different from the point you tried to make earlier.

SilentJay

I like the points you make, but there is certainly plenty of room for disagreement.

I think you are right about why Walsh went after Kidd, but at the time not many people thought it was a good move. Perhaps you did, but that flirtation left many of us scratching our heads because Kidd’s better days are long done. He had a decent year but he can’t hang with these young top flight guards anymore. So Kidd had some upside and some downside which leads to my point. Walsh is clearly willing to step outside the 2010 plan if he believes it is possible to add a piece before 2010. Kidd would have been a big gamble.

You are absolutely correct that the success of the plan hinges on creating more cap space. That means moving Curry and/or Jeffries for expiring contracts, not just to move them, unless we can get quality in return. That is certainly possible and a great hope to have. But that is not a certainty,
We will see what happens with Jeffries, but I would venture to guess that patience isn’t what has Jeffries clogging up the process. It’s the inability to find a deal that fits, therefore his options on Lee and Robinson are limited.

Until the entire matter plays itself out, I guess there are at least two ways to look at it “team turmoil” or “driven patience.” 2010 is not that far off so we should soon see what it really is.

i didn’t want sessions for 4 million plus which is what he wants in a long term deal.

IGM, it’s not a failure to sign those two players it’s his choice to not subdue to their prices. This really only has to do with David Lee.

So, the two of you want to give David Lee $10 to $12 million per. Okay, go for it.

Stick to the plan. Good on ya DW.

Something will give soon.

Sessions
Lee
Nate
Rubio
AI
Tinsley

All those names will start falling into place this week I think.

I dont think other GM’s value Lee as a 10-12 mil per player so best of luck to him and his camp in whatever they are thinking.

Nate will be back at QO

Rubio will officially declare his signing with FC Barcelona thus killing the whole 5th pick choice for Minny. Kahn should have sucked it up and traded him.

AI most likely to Charlotte.

Tinsley maybe Miami

Sessions probably back in Milwaukee

I think DW moves Jeffries and then we can all wait and see about Curry in camp and preseason.

Yay

lol they have the clippers listed as both a “team in turmoil” and a “team turnaround”

are you f’ing kidding me?

maybe if we make a couple of moves before training camp, we can make both of the lists too lol

I also liked that they had the Wizards clearly as the number one mainly because of the Twolves trade, while the Twoives are in turmoil because they traded two good NBA players for a point guard “holding them hostage in Spain”

I really hope this Rubio thing backfires on Kahn

Off Topic, but this brings a smile to a knicks fan face:

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/top_plays/2009/08/26/nba_20090829_nyk_top10.nba/

Oh another thing, about that Curry jab. Check ALL of my articles leading up to the draft, I talked about Hill and how if Curry wasn’t there the Knicks should, and would take him. The day of, I was hearing that Evans would drop so I predicted, wishfully thinking, that he would drop to the Knicks. More just a hope than a prediction. But I wrote a scouting report on Hill, and an article about his connection to the Knicks and Nets and his similarities to Brook Lopez. Archive them. I was on that from day 1.

are you really going to throw out that “best scorer on a bad team” BS? c’mon. Devin Harris was the best scorer on a 34 win team. Danny Granger was the best scorer on a 36 win team. Chris Bosh was the best scorer on a 34 win team. none of those guys have ever won anything substantial, so please don’t use that contradicting argument.

but those three guys you mention have a future,all are basicly young and upcoming ,harrington was just a piece to fill a spot.who would you rather have myles devin harris,chris bosh,danny granger or al harrington.christ that last sentence looks like one of those “WHICH ONE DOES NOT BELONG”questions

LOL. You go Bob. Agreed 100%

I preface this post by saying that I think Sessions is a good (not great player) who could benefit from playing for D’Antoni. That being said, I don’t necessarily think he represents that much of an upgrade from a Chris Duhon, who if playing 30 to 32 minutes instead of 38 to 40 is an effective enough PG for what the Knicks currently need.

I don’t look at the lack of activity for the Knicks this offseason as a minus but a plus. Regardless of the ’2010′ plan, DW made attempts to make a playoff run for 2009 with veterans who opted to go in another direction to get a ring/better money (can’t blame anyone for that). The team could have ended up signing DLee or Nate to max contracts that would have hamstrung the team financially and on the court, would probably result in essentially a replication of the second half of last season (outside of some more time for Gallo).

For those who are upset at not giving the money to DLee and Nate:

A) DLee is a more athletic Jeff Foster with half the basketball IQ.
B) Nate on his best day is a poorman’s Vinnie Johnson and on a team that doesn’t have All-World players or for that matter Savvy Veterans (like the Pistons did), then his effectiveness is minimized.

Would Sessions give the Knicks a young PG who can penetrate to the basket, can kick it out to perimeter shooters, can create, and is a decent on-ball defender? Yes.

However, the Knicks just drafted Toney Douglas, who is a month younger and 1″ shorter then Sessions. While he might not be as great of an athlete as Sessions, he already has a guaranteed contract for a hell of lot less than what Sessions would be looking for, with a team option at the end of it. His game has room to develop and he is already a better defender then Sessions (with Ramon having already been in the league for two years).

This is not the Utah Jazz in 1984 when they had Ricky Green and decided to hand the reins to a young John Stockton….Sessions is not going to take this team to the next level. I’ll take a guy who played in the ACC for 4 years (against some teams that could have beaten the Knicks on a good day last year) who was All ACC Defensive Team Junior and Senior Season and the 2009 ACC Defensive Player of the Year then a kid who came out early, got drafted much later then he wanted, couldn’t beat out Charlie Bell (!!!!!!) to get time as the #2 PG in his rookie year and then, because he was competing against (at various points in the season) Tyronn Lue, Charlie Bell, Luke Ridnour, and Damon Jones was able to get decent minutes.

To quote Derrick Coleman….Whoop-de-damn-do

Espn is for Nascar fans,they are total morons and they think yhey are so funny,the Knicks haven’t been in this much control in years,we got rid of turmoil in Marlbury and Randolph,Lee and N8 want to play here,other players want to play here,Lebron is a lock because of the moves of our new GM,ESPN does not have a clue what they are talking about ,Hill might be the best pick in the draft and could very easy turn into a Bosh that plays defense,I love our plan,Sessions is not a starter and the only team that wants him are the clippers,give me a break with Sessions ,people have him like we need to sign Clyde the guy is not a starter,Duhon blows him away so relax with Sessions.ESPN is in turmoil because they suck so bad only nascar people could stand their stupid insight.If you want to listen to football people listen to Howie and Terry those guys are fun,ESPN sucks major big butt.

So don’t use that bogus argument because I can mention several players who have done nothing but lose but are praised. Al Jefferson and Kevin Durant have done nothing but score on horrendous team. Skill has nothing to do with age, that’s upside youre talking about. Don’t blame Al Harrington for scoring when the Knicks had no other options. Putting up 20 and 6 shooting a better percentage from the field than Joe Johnson. You guys are a piece of work with how you contradict yourself. You bash Isiah but you want Walsh to commit to Sessions and Lee with no other offers out there. I want Sessions on this team, but it really makes me laugh when IGM says that Walsh isn’t committed to 2010 because he hasn’t given Lee 10 to 12 million. That’s what Lee wants, IGM, if you want Walsh to give that to him, you probably were a huge Isiah Thomas supporter. Sessions has no other deal on the table. Not one. There’s no need to offer him a long term deal. Stop contradicting yourself and understand that there’s no rush to get these things done. Walsh is trying to establish an organization where players get paid based on their worth, not upside or potential. That’s the right way to do things.

players dont lose teams lose!how the hell can you mention kevin durant,when hes only been in the league for 2 years?”hes done nothing but score on a horrendous team” and i for one have never mentioned david lee in my life. i just want to watch some decent ball from the knicks.we need a point guard and sessions is available at less than walsh paid that back up chris duhon.(another questionable move by walsh)pretty soon all the walsh kissers will be saying”oh,i meant 2011,or was it 2012?2013?

Just wait and relax.
Mike D’ Antoni and D Walsh are doing their best. They are working hard and
The Knicks will be good this year.

Sessions consistently loses….is that because of the Bucks record his first two years? He was a winner his one year at Nevada-WAC champions. I love it when people jump to conclusions….do we count Kevin Durant as a loser as well? He lost alot of games for the Thunder! And of course this won’t get a response…..

That said I do agree Sessions hasn’t done enough for a long contract….but thats how you get a bargain. If you wait for him to prove it, he will want major dollars. I still see a deal for 4 million in 2009-2010 and 2nd year mostly unguaranteed so the space is available for LeBron and hopefully a 2nd guy. I personally believe he will be worth the long-term deal at only 4 per season, but understand (and agree) that Sessions might get in the way of LeBron and that can’t happen.

Bob is right on this one…..Sessions price is low because he is unproven….thats how you get a steal! If he signs here and averages 16ppg, 10apg, 4rpg, 1.5 spg he will get alot more than 4 million per year from someone in free agency. Those numbers are reasonable in this system next season….he averaged 12.4ppg, 5.7apg, 3.4rpg, 1.1spg in only 28 minutes per game. Increased minutes, increased system….soon to be increased price

yeah,this from a guy who wants to sign von wafer

Mr. Mills,

I suggest you get a better handle on where the bogus argument is in this discussion.

First, you set up the discussion by suggesting that Harrington was a valuable player because he was the best scorer on the team. Based on your logic that the best scorer on a losing team is not necessarily a bad player, then you may realize that being the best scorer on a bad team doesn’t make Harrington a good player. Zach Randolph or Jamal Crawford could have been our best scorer, what would you have said then,

Second, you conveniently ignored the more important and essential points about Harrington 1. being the best scorer removed from the starting line-up by his coach; 2. becoming a black hole; 3. disappearing at the end of games; 4. losing focus and concentration at the end of games (like hanging on rims); 5. lack of defensive intensity; 6. being on the downside of a mediocre career.

I bet you can’t address those six points about his lack of value?

I now understand your strategy is to focus on the argument and made up impressions of the commenter instead of the facts. For example, you have no idea what I might think of Isiah Thomas. What I will share is that he is gone, I am glad and he is not relevant to this conversation or your argument. You just throw his name out there to hide the fact your rebuttal is weaker than Isiah’s coaching.

Also, you need to find for me where I wrote that I want Walsh to give Lee $10-12 million. Please find that for me.

Please, stop making stuff up to support your bogus argument. That’s the right way to do things.

Thank you for the explanation about your Curry “prediction,” versus your Hill “insight.”

I agree that Toney Douglas is a sleeper and probably a keeper. If that is the case, he can solve a major problem we have at point.

IF THE KNICKS COME UP EMPTY IN 2010, I CAN LIVE WITH THAT. I CAN’T LIVE WITH NOT BEING A CONTENDER IN THE MARKET TO BE ABLE TO ACQUIRE A LEBRON, WADE, OR BOSH. IF WE LOSE NATE OR LEE SO BE IT. THEIR TALENT, LIKE 85% OF THE NBA PLAYERS CAN BE REPLACED. BUT U HAVE 2 SUPERSTARS AND A COUPLE OF ALLSTARS AVAILABLE. I DONT THINK THE SUPERSTARS ARE MOVING BUT I’LL TAKE THE CHANCE OF LOSING THE EXPENDABLE PLAYERS.
ALMOST EVERY TEAM HAS A ALLSTAR OR GO TO GUY IN THE 4TH QTR. THE KNICKS LOST MANY GAMES IN THE 4TH QTR. THAT’S WHEN THAT 18-20 MILL PLAYER EARNS HIS PAY.
DONNIE MADE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT BEING A CONTENDER FOR 2010 IS OUR GOAL. HE HAS BEEN A MAN OF HIS WORD ALL SUMMER. EVEN IF DUHON IS OUR STARTING PG. NO PRESIDENT THOMAS MISTAKES HERE, BUDDY.

Well said!

DEAR MR. IGMKNICKS,

Glen Davis PF 23 6-9 289 LSU $2,500,000
Rasheed Wallace FC 34 6-11 230 North Carolina $5,854,000
Anthony Parker SG 34 6-6 215 Bradley $2,644,231
Charlie Villanueva PF 25 6-11 232 Connecticut $6,500,000
Ben Wallace PF 34 6-9 240 Virginia Union $825,497
Matt Barnes SF 29 6-7 226 UCLA $1,600,000

MY POINT IS, IF U HAVE A SUPERSTAR ON YOUR TEAM, YOU CAN FIND GOOD ROLE PLAYERS FOR A CHEAP PRICE. I CAN PICK 4 PLAYERS ON THIS LIST AND HAVE CHANGE LEFT OVER IF I HAD 12 MIL. YOU SAID THREE. ALL OF THESE PLAYERS SIGNED WITH A DIFFRENT TEAM THIS SUMMER.
GLEN DAVIS IS BETTER THEN DAVIS LEE AND HE WAS A FREE AGENT THIS YEAR. HE TOOK 2.5 MIL TO PLAY WITH A GOOD TEAM.

you said that the walh’s “failure” to sign Lee demonstrated his lack of commitment towards 2010. In order to sign Lee, Walsh would need to give him 10-12 per. Therefore, you support giving him that.

Ok Bob. Also the guy that called the Jordan Hill situation 4 months before he was picked . A lot of people wanted von wafer.

There’s no bogus argument where I’m going from. You can say what you want about Harrington. He doesn’t play defense, neither does Devin Harris. All I’m saying is stop bashing a guy who puts up 20 points just because he’s on a bad team. What, is he supposed to put up 15 ppg and it’s better? His removal from the starting lineup had nothing to do with his skill. 39 points against New Jersey, 39 points against Cleveland, 33 against Indiana etc.

And when Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford were our leading scorers they were valuable players.

This is the person that said the Harrington and Hughes trades conflicted with 2010. Point is, we’re not in turmoil, at all. I’m done.

nice… IMGKNICKS got schooled.

hey parkerstrong,

newsflash! every nba player won awhole lot before they got to the nba. they were most likely the best player on almost every team theyve ever played on.

OMG !!! IMGKNICKS!

how do you not understand this..

Harrington and hughes were aquired because of their contracts.
that is it. that is the only reason.

why are you argueing whether harrington is good or not.

just refer to him as “harringtons expiring contract” from now on