Another hypothetical trade idea with the NY Knicks

Why the Knick's don't do it:

Mo T is deadweight, and so are Ward and Gaines. Kurt Thomas and Jerome Williams could provide the Knicks with the sorely needed rebounding punch and defense from the PF spot.





Don't see it.

Taylor is no better than Sweetney at this point. I don't see them paying $9 for a backup 4 to Sweetney (no way Taylor starts over him).

Don't see what good Ward does for them , seeing as how they have a 40 MPG PG in Marbury and two combo guards to handle the backup minutes in Hardaway and Crawford. Not to mention the fact that Ward is still recovering from knee surgery (who knows how hell rebound).

Least we forget they still have over 2 years left on Norris' contract @ around $10 MIL.

Ward doesn't help them talent wise or contract wise, and neither does Taylor. In the meantime, they are losing a double double guy in Thomas.

They may be dumping off a bad contract in Jerome Williams, but they are getting two of them back in return.

Knicks would be worse off with this trade than they are already.

 

I don't see one of the lesser defensive and rebounding teams in the league, letting go of their two best defenders and two of their best rebounders to save 1 year and $15 MIL, only to get much worse defensively and rebounding wise, not to mention, not upgrading offensively.

Thomas just turned 32 4 months ago, and is averaging a double double, can defend and hit the outside jump shot. He is an asset and NY is not going to give him away to jettison salary, much less, to gain only 1 year.

They are not winning because of other factors, not Kurt Thomas. Losing teams don't trade away one of their best players without getting another good player in return. The Knicks are getting nothing in return in your trade. They are losing talent and gaining nothing in cap space or talent over what they already have.

Sweetney and Mohammed aren't better than Thomas right now, so I don't see the need to give them minutes over Thomas, much less, Mohammed is not a PF anyway.

Mo would be deadweight to any team IMO. He is a semi-scoring 4 from the outside the last few years. His low post game has gone away because he can't elevate after the injury. In fact, judging by the games Ive seen Thomas play in, his outside jumper might be better than Mo's at this point. Curious that on a team lacking for a good 4, Mo can't even get P.T. these days.

And if NY felt that desperate (enough to give away Thomas) to give away their best frontcourt player just because he got into an argument with Marbury, he'd be gone by now because other teams would and could offer them more than Mo Taylor and his bad contract as the center piece. Not to mention the fact that Marbury has a habit of not getting along with alot of his teamates since has been in the league.

So by your theory, xing out Gaines and Ward, NY is going to give away two players, who have high contracts, but at least are main rotation players who consistently produce, to save money is 2 years, for only 1 year, and take back a player who would sit behind Sweetney at $9 MIL per year?

Oh, and in two years, when Mo's contract expires, NY would have been under the cap anyway (probably by $10 - $14 MIL) if they hang on to Thomas and Williams.

 

In two years, when they will already be way under the cap.

And I believe they want to change it, but rather, this summer, rather than 2 years down the road when they will no longer have payroll issues even if they don't trade Williams and Thomas.

Young, inexpensive players does not equal Mo Taylor. And Mo Taylor is a "piece" alright. Not something the Knicks would think would upgrade their team, which according to Berman, is what their objective is (i.e. "building moves").

It's not up to me to try, its up to CD. If Thomas was even available (Ive suggested recently that hes not), you don't think CD has had conversations? I know you think CD sucks, but its been documented recently that hes on the phone every day, all day long, trying to improve the team.

Or maybe it has been, and its been rejected because the Knicks want more. Lets not prenent we are privy to all the trade rumors that are spoken of in the offices of GM's across the NBA.

You are suggesting, that because of the argument, one of the two has to go. This is clearly not always the case. For all we know, they patched up their differences, which might be since we haven't heard anything of it since.

How does a weak defensive and rebounding team solve its chemistry problems by become worse defensively and worse rebounding wise?

Come on SJC. If you really felt that Taylor's 4 year age advantage on Thomas is somehow of a blessing, despite Taylor's overall shortcomings to Thomas in overall talent, you wouldn't want to trade him, especially when you have complained in the past about the recent deals that have made this team older.

They can use $14 MIL to sign a big name FA, and a coupld of second tier guys and fill out the roster with draft picks and vet minimums. This is a formula that has already been done and will always be done.

$15 MIL is nothing to NY, considering the drop off in talent they would suffer in this trade, not to mention the fact that the team would be worse off overall and not address their weaknesses.

According to REAL GM, they will in 2 years and since according to your Berman article, NY is building for the future, then its reasonable to assume that will be their objective.


If NY wanted to give away Thomas just to save $15 MIL in hard cash (with no talent upgrade or salary cap benefits), then they wouldn't have signed him to that extension this past summer right?

If you can admit that NY signed THomas to that contract because they a) Want to keep him and b) Believe his is a good starting 4, then you would have to admit that NY would have no interest in doing this trade, despite an off the court argumentt and despite saving $15 MIL (for a team that has the highest revenue in the league).

 

So you don't think 9 guys can be signed with $14 Mil in cap space, draft picks, vet mins, etc.?

Tell that to the Spurs because they did just that a few years ago.

Trading away a good starting 4 and a good quality backup 3/4 to save $15 MIL in hard cash in 2 years is not a building move no matter how much you want to redefine the definition of what "building" is. Building is not taking away from your talent base, even if it is to allow a lesser talent more PT. That is flat out taking away from your talent base and the exact oppposite of "building".

Berman never suggested in his article that Thomas is available. He theorized Thomas might have to be be included in a deal for the Knicks to get what they want.

You still ignore the part of the article that you cited that says "The inexpensive young players the Knicks seek".

SirJackieChiles:

"Apparently that great offer you think they would get has not been made (yet, at least)."

I think it is completely unrealistic given the fact that if THomas was available for garbage contracts, he would have been gone by now IMO.

Thats wonderful. How about taking a view from the other side of things to look how it makes the OTHER team better, since ...well, thats why trades are usually made.

Thats often a forgotten theory when playing fantasy GM.

You made the argument that this trade saves NY $15 MIL in two years when they are already projected to be $14 MIL under the cap.

You made the argument this saves NY, the richest team in the league $15 MIL in hard cash in 2 years.

I am being releastic since NY is going to what your trade to benefit them too, not just us.

If we want to play fantasy here, then lets talk about a Mo Taylor for KG swap since we don't care what the other team wants.

Unless this is all just for fun.

Its worked for San Antonio.

Plus, NY will have 4 players under contract, assuming they excercise Sweetney's option.

They signed the contract after he had a good season, and then traded him after he had an injury filled bad season for Antoine Walker.

Thomas hasn't had an injury filled bad season after his signing, and Mo Taylor doesn't equal Antoine Walker.

Bad comparison.

Ariza doesn't play the same position as Thomas. Not sure why you are bringing him up.

Sweetney hasn't done anything to suggest he should be starting over Thomas, nor has he done anything to suggest he should eat into Thomas's minutes or take his starting spot.

I didn't suggest they are trying to, I suggested they will be. Thats a fact.

You are the one who suggested this trade is about NY saving money. In fact, if you concede that despite Taylor's age advantage, that this trade only improves NY financially, and not on the court, then my argument about their revenue is more about your argument than about their salary cap situation in 2 years.

No, but having high revenue means you aren't likely to make a trade for money reasons when it does nothing to improve your team on the court.

1) Again, Ariza doesn't play the 4 for them at all. So lets leave him out of this equation.

2) If NY wants a trade to remove Thomas, just to allow Sweetney more time at the 4 (and btw, Sweetney has played more 5 this season than 4 anyway), then why wouldn't NY shoot to get some young, inexpensive talent for Thomas (per the Berman article that you cited)?

Your trade idea seems to be all about two things: Freeing up $15 MIL in cash and freeing up P.T. for a rookie who hasn't seen signficant minutes at the 4 this year.

 

Wow,

That is a lot of posting....and quoting.

Too much for my tired old eyes.

Of course the Rocks would do it, and should offer it.....

But will the Knicks take it? Stranger things have happened.

See Mark Cuban.

DD

 

very rarely can a team lose all their dead weight for some decent players.

dang, SJC, I expect more from you. this is crippling to your status. CRIPPLING.

 

Supply and demand.

What can the Knicks get for Kurt Thomas?

A lot of teams will want him. Minnesota, for example. Orlando, perhaps? How about Miami? There's lot's of places that can use him.

With the Knicks, money doesn't matter. They don't care how much they pay, it's just whether the player has market value. Moochie, for example, has no market value. That bothers the Knicks - not that they have to go through the couch cushions for the 5 million/season.

So, looking at your proposal, the two Knick guys have market value. Other teams are interested in both Kurt Thomas and Jerome Williams.

On the other hand, you take Rockets with little market value and offer them back.

I think, to entice the Knicks, you are going to have to offer something else of value along with Mo (Spoon's expiring deal;a pick, Sura, Wesley, the TE in a seperate deal) and/or also offer to take something the Knicks want to get rid of - like Moochie.

Welcome home, Moochie. Your billboards are waiting.

Is that enough to compete with other teams? We'll have to see. But taking on the Mooch would be a strong incentive.

Here's a shot :

Deal # 1

Houston trades: PF Maurice Taylor (7.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 1.4 apg in 23.8 minutes)
Houston receives: PG Moochie Norris (2.7 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 1.2 apg in 10.7 minutes)
C Kurt Thomas (11.3 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 2.0 apg in 36.6 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +6.2 ppg, +7.1 rpg, and +1.8 apg.

New York trades: PG Moochie Norris (2.7 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 1.2 apg in 10.7 minutes)
C Kurt Thomas (11.3 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 2.0 apg in 36.6 minutes)
New York receives: PF Maurice Taylor (7.8 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 1.4 apg in 23.8 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -6.2 ppg, -7.1 rpg, and -1.8 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

Note : Kurt Thomas has a Trade Kicker - he would cost Les a lot of money as a transaction fee. On the other hand, we'd get a rebounder.

I would think it would also cost us our pick.

We could also do a Deal # 2 - Spoon for JYD. Even a Deal # 3 - TE for Vin Baker or other trash - just as incentive.


BIG PROBLEM : Mo Taylor is a David Falk client. Zeke hate Falk long time.

----------------------

So here's a challenge, SJC. Figure out how to do this where MO goes to a THIRD team, and a non-falk replacement for the 4 or 5 goes to NY. . Perhaps a Malik Rose or Rasho Nesterovic.

 

Quit trying to confuse the issue and arguments.

You suggested a team can't be built with only 4 signed players and a ton of cap space. I said SA did just that a few years ago.

Team revenue has nothing to due with using $14 MIL to build a team with only 4 signed players.

My opinion that if NY was willing to trade him for garbage has nothing to do with being privy to GM conversations. It has to do with the reality that if this was indeed the case (NY giving him away for garbage) that a deal would have indeed be made since their are a) Alot of teams that would love to have Thomas and b) Alot of teams have garbage they want to get rid of.

NY having chemistry problems between Thomas and Marbury on the court is pure speculation on your part.

Webber and Peja have off the court problems, yet, are fine with each other on the court.

Yet NY loses in overall talent.

- NY saves a lot of money[/quote]

In two years, when they obviously will no longer be having money problems.

In correct. Again, Ariza has not played 1 min at the 4 this year and Sweetney has been the backup 5 almost all season.

www.82games.com

The article you cited suggested the Knicks want "young, inexpensive talent" and might have to tade Thomas to acheive that objective.

Your article does nothing to support your trade proposal. In fact, it suggests the opposite of what you are trying to acheive.

I was a big JJ fan. And before he was traded, I had maintained that he was one of our few tradeable commodities, which, he turned out to be.

Just because I like a player doesn't mean a) I don't think he should be traded or b) I don't think he wouldn't be traded.

The only way NY wins in this instance is a) If either Mo produces more than what Thomas did (unlikely) or b) If Sweetney can switch to the 4 and produce more than what Thomas did (possibly, but a long shot).

Thomas' talent advantage negates Mo's age advantage, unless you feel a) NY can't get a better 4 in return for Thomas or b) Mo's production at 32 would exceed Thomas' production at 36

It was just a matter of time before you started the name calling and overall SJC the ****head act I guess. *sigh*

You suggested that we should concentrate on how a trade benefits us instead of the other team right?

Thats fantasy GMing at its finest.

Again ..see San Antonio. It can be done and has been done.

So you'd rather have Mo at $9 MIL than Atoine @ $12 MIL?

Well just have to disagree on that.

Again, you are speculating that there is a chemistry problem just because of a argument in practice.

You have lost track of the article.

The article didn't suggest that the Knicks are trying to trade Thomas for young inexpensive talent. The writer gives his opinion that Thomas might have to be moved to get that young inexpensive talent.

Assuming the Knicks would be willing to part with Thomas, just to get rid of bad contracts, would it not be reasonable to assume that would jettison T. Thomas, Houston, Baker and Hardaway before they considered J. Williams? His contract is tame compared to those.

Thats all this trade does, is make NY younger by 4 years at the 4 spot, leaving them no proven player at the 4 besides 4, and weakening their talent base and overall producting, while making their short term weaknesses, even worse.

It puts them at no distinct financial advantage in 2 years, over what they already are projected to be . And BTW, your #s are off, assuming they gain Taylor and lose Thomas/Williams, they will be only saving $8 MIL in hard case in 2 years, not $15 MIL.

 

Pasox,

IMO, you are going to have to take back more than Moochie's contract. As I stated earlier, NY has worse contracts than Moochie and J. Williams. Moochie is a FA after next year.

I don't see NY giving away Thomas just to get rid of Moochie one year early, do you?

 

SirJackieChiles - "Obviously, I think about trades wondering how we could make OUR team better, if that escaped you."

This after I brought up the counterpoint about NY's perspective on the deal.

Do you not mean to suggest that you are, on purpose, trying to weigh a trade more in our favor than another team's, and that you suggest trades without really considering whether or not they REALLy benefit the other team? If so, then my "stupid" trade proposal was right in line with your logic, even it was extreme.

The $15 MIL is not a lump sum savings like you seem to be suggesting though. Rather, its spread out over 2 years at around $8 MIL per year to be used on other players.

Actually, hell be 35 during the 2007-2008 season. PJ Brown is still putting up KT like #s at 35, why can't Thomas?