Thread Tools

Display Modes

**croco** · 04-18-2008, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truknicksfan

glorified rebounder??? You mean glorified hustle guy, rebounder, hard worker, and can finsih around the rim with the best of them. yeaaahhh goodd summary of him as a player.

And how can u excpect him to have better stats this year when the team won 23 games and u have curry and zach killing the teams offenseive chemistry. He can esaliy be a 15-10 guy. Easy.

As for the 13 mil, not worth it, but hell take less so im not worried.

He is a role player, a career 10-12 ppg / 9-11 rpg undersized PF, you don't pay them more than 6-7 mios or you are screwed with the salary cap.

Tragedy · 04-18-2008, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truknicksfan

glorified rebounder??? You mean glorified hustle guy, rebounder, hard worker, and can finsih around the rim with the best of them. yeaaahhh goodd summary of him as a player.

And how can u excpect him to have better stats this year when the team won 23 games and u have curry and zach killing the teams offenseive chemistry. He can esaliy be a 15-10 guy. Easy.

As for the 13 mil, not worth it, but hell take less so im not worried.

15/10 isn't 13 mil. that's 8 mil.

Tragedy · 04-18-2008, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by croco

He is a role player, a career 10-12 ppg / 9-11 rpg undersized PF, you don't pay them more than 6-7 mios or you are screwed with the salary cap.

Agreed. He's a complimentary role player. 13 million a year is what you give your number 2 guy.

**Truknicksfan** · 04-18-2008, 01:32 PM

Quote:

15/10 isn't 13 mil. that's 8 mil.

Thats why I said in my orignal post..."As for the 13 mil, not worth it, but hell take less so im not worried."

WeMiss Charles Oakley · 04-18-2008, 01:35 PM

No doubt his agent planted that story in the newspapers...smart.

He sure isn't worth it, and the Knicks should trade him to anyone that will take on one of those awful contracts (The big center that never plays, or Q-Rich or Zach).

**knicksfan** · 04-18-2008, 01:36 PM

I wouldnt push much more than the MLE for Lee honestly, he's a good double-double off the bench, but he's not exactly a star. We can't overpay hustle guys, that's what screwed us up in the Scott Layden era with guys like Shandon Anderson and Howard Eisley and Othella Harrington. If he's really seeking this much, pack him up with Zach for expirings and a 1st rounder. We need to immediatly differentiate between potential solid core guys, and potential go-to guys. Lee is certainly the former moreso than the latter.

As far as Q-Rich goes, I don't consider him a "bad contract" per se. He sure gets hurt a lot, but he's a good shooter off the bench who also goes inside, rebounds and plays his butt off when given the opportunity to do so. Heck, if you want to go super-small ball on occasion, he'd even be an asset at power forward. I've always very strongly liked Richardson as a player, and was upset that he was not given the opportunity to show more. If he's stuck playing two-guard with other athletic superstars then he can't use the combination of great strength he has coupled with the athleticism, but in a post spot I think he would. I don't see him as a liability at all as a power 3/4 type player.

Heck, if Barkley played Power Forward in the league for so many years at 6-5, we can ask Q-Rich (who's an inch taller) to play the post. Not to sound like some crazy wishful thinker, he's no Charles Barkley, not even close, just my point is that we should use him as a backup post player, because of his strength and rebounding ability. I like him as a player.

**Da Grinch** · 04-18-2008, 02:53 PM

David Lee getting that kind of money really isn't as out there as it seems players of his relative ilk do get that money sometimes , Nene got 6 yrs. 60 mil.

dalembert also got that kind of money , tyson chandler and eddy curry after seasons not so dissimilar than Lee .

the differnce of course is potential...they have more than Lee , you can run an offense around curry

Tyson and dalembert can singlehandedly anchor your defense.

Nene hasn't proven he is worth that much yet in any way .

okafor turned down 12 mil. a season .

deng and gordon on the bulls each turned down 5 yr. 50 mil. offers.

to ask for this kind of money is not a wild notion nor is it even for him to get it , but he will be counted among the members of the league as overpaid, unless he winds up avg. near 20-10 and i strongly doubt the 20 will happen.

Tragedy · 04-18-2008, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Da Grinch

David Lee getting that kind of money really isn't as out there as it seems players of his relative ilk do get that money sometimes , Nene got 6 yrs. 60 mil.

dalembert also got that kind of money , tyson chandler and eddy curry after seasons not so dissimilar than Lee .

the differnce of course is potential...they have more than Lee , you can run an offense around curry

Tyson and dalembert can singlehandedly anchor your defense.

Nene hasn't proven he is worth that much yet in any way .

okafor turned down 12 mil. a season .

deng and gordon on the bulls each turned down 5 yr. 50 mil. offers.

to ask for this kind of money is not a wild notion nor is it even for him to get it , but he will be counted among the members of the league as overpaid, unless he winds up avg. near 20-10 and i strongly doubt the 20 will happen.

Are any of them worth it? NO.

Tragedy · 04-18-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knicksfan

I wouldnt push much more than the MLE for Lee honestly, he's a good double-double off the bench, but he's not exactly a star. We can't overpay hustle guys, that's what screwed us up in the Scott Layden era with guys like Shandon Anderson and Howard Eisley and Othella Harrington. If he's really seeking this much, pack him up with Zach for expirings and a 1st rounder. We need to immediatly differentiate between potential solid core guys, and potential go-to guys. Lee is certainly the former moreso than the latter.

As far as Q-Rich goes, I don't consider him a "bad contract" per se. He sure gets hurt a lot, but he's a good shooter off the bench who also goes inside, rebounds and plays his butt off when given the opportunity to do so. Heck, if you want to go super-small ball on occasion, he'd even be an asset at power forward. I've always very strongly liked Richardson as a player, and was upset that he was not given the opportunity to show more. If he's stuck playing two-guard with other athletic superstars then he can't use the combination of great strength he has coupled with the athleticism, but in a post spot I think he would. I don't see him as a liability at all as a power 3/4 type player.

Heck, if Barkley played Power Forward in the league for so many years at 6-5, we can ask Q-Rich (who's an inch taller) to play the post. Not to sound like some crazy wishful thinker, he's no Charles Barkley, not even close, just my point is that we should use him as a backup post player, because of his strength and rebounding ability. I like him as a player.

barkley is 6'6, and is a HOFer and top 5 PF of all time. Insulting to even mention Q Rich in the same sentence.

**knicksfan** · 04-18-2008, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tragedy

barkley is 6'6, and is a HOFer and top 5 PF of all time. Insulting to even mention Q Rich in the same sentence.

Gotta learn to read a bit, I specifically stated that Richardson is nowhere near the caliber of Barkley, but the fact is that his skillset (in my opinion) would allow for him to be a succesful post player, and therefore something the Knicks can actually use as an asset. I was merely mentioning Barkley to say that guys who have been considered to be too short to play the Power Forward position have been succesful in doing so, and Barkley is a prime example of that. Furthermore, it is my opinion that Richardson's skills (rebounding, good inside defense, great strength, solid defense) would allow for him to become a factor for us at power forward.

TwinkieFoot · 04-18-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knicksfan

Gotta learn to read a bit, I specifically stated that Richardson is nowhere near the caliber of Barkley, but the fact is that his skillset (in my opinion) would allow for him to be a succesful post player, and therefore something the Knicks can actually use as an asset. I was merely mentioning Barkley to say that guys who have been considered to be too short to play the Power Forward position have been succesful in doing so, and Barkley is a prime example of that. Furthermore, it is my opinion that Richardson's skills (rebounding, good inside defense, great strength, solid defense) would allow for him to become a factor for us at power forward.

I don't think playing Richardson at the 4 spot is too wild an idea. If you switch to an uptempo offense, I think he can actually be pretty effective there. I think his natural position on the floor of course is at the 3 spot. For the life of me though, I can not understand why he has never been used in the post at that position where he'd obviously have an advantage over any other player. Isiah wanted a solid post player to go next to Eddy Curry and I think he had him there all the while. The only explanation I could think of not to play Richardson closer to the basket is because of his back problems; you need your back to be healthy in order to bang and rebound.

Tragedy · 04-18-2008, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by knicksfan

Gotta learn to read a bit, I specifically stated that Richardson is nowhere near the caliber of Barkley, but the fact is that his skillset (in my opinion) would allow for him to be a succesful post player, and therefore something the Knicks can actually use as an asset. I was merely mentioning Barkley to say that guys who have been considered to be too short to play the Power Forward position have been succesful in doing so, and Barkley is a prime example of that. Furthermore, it is my opinion that Richardson's skills (rebounding, good inside defense, great strength, solid defense) would allow for him to become a factor for us at power forward.

No, I read what you said, but it's STILL ridiculous to even compare. He is a 3 who can do a little in the post, but you're a pf because you GUARD power forwards, not because you play the position. He would be overmatched against the nba's power forwards.

TwinkieFoot · 04-18-2008, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tragedy

No, I read what you said, but it's STILL ridiculous to even compare. He is a 3 who can do a little in the post, but you're a pf because you GUARD power forwards, not because you play the position. He would be overmatched against the nba's power forwards.

He might not be able to do it full time but he should be alrig

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes