No Rose? Trade Down!
by OTP
on May 14, 2008 1:10 PM EDT
Okay, hypothetical here:
We get the 2nd spot in the lottery. Rose goes first to the Warriors (hey--it's my hypothetical, and I don't care if they only have a 1.7 percent chance of winning the lottery), and we're sitting at #2.
Do we take Beasley? Do we trade down? What do you all think?
Me: I say we trade down to the top 8 or so, pick up some assets (like getting our 2010 first rounder back, as well as the 2 2nd rounders we don't have), and take the best player available. Maybe we even get Seattle to bite and pick up a guy this year (Darrell Arthur?) that allows us to buy out one of our hulking behemoths.
Basically, I just want to start the conversation: what can we get in a trade down, and is it worth more to us than the second coming of Derrick Coleman?
1 recs |
13
comments
EmailComments
i've thought about this.
promising, appropriate guys like westbrook and augustin are going to be available later. i don’t know about trading down from 2…but what about from 4 or 5?
Posting and Toasting: Unabashed Knicks fanaticism with the occasional poop joke.
by Seth on May 14, 2008 5:01 PM EDT 0 recs
Also
Miami might take Rose, so forget about the 1.7% chance of G-State.
Either way, I’d have no problem trading out of a non-Rose pick to get rid of a crappy contract or 2.
jeterchrist.blogspot.com
by Dachs on May 14, 2008 6:25 PM EDT 0 recs
what r thoughts
on that thabeet guy out of uconn. ive seen him play and he’s raw as hell but he blocks everything that comes near him. this is a deff a need the knicks have to fill. if they can somehow move zbo with this and get another pick later in the draft or a good complementary small forward i wouldnt mind it either
by antnyk on May 14, 2008 7:22 PM EDT 0 recs
i think
thabeet is staying at uconn, but he’ll be a lottery pick next year.
Ewing with the step...YES! and the foul!
by Anthony Masons Haircut on
May 16, 2008 11:12 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Not this year
I really like him too and would love to get him, but I think he’s going back to UConn for another year at least.
jeterchrist.blogspot.com
by Dachs on May 14, 2008 8:07 PM EDT 0 recs
Poop Explosions
No matter where our pick is- 2nd, 3rd, 8th, wherever. If we can’t get Rose, what’s the point of taking the “next best” player. The next four players best players in the draft besides Beasley and Rose are the OPPOSITE of what we need. O.J. Mayo will shoot more than he passes. Bayless will shoot more than he passes. Gordon will shoot more than he passes. If we want a guard that will shoot more than he passes, we should just trade for Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, Nate Robinson, or Jamal Crawford. Oh wait- WE ALREADY MOTHERFUCKING DID. I hate this draft. No Rose=Trade down. Maybe we can get some role players….anybody remember what those are? I don’t- I’ve been a knicks fan for the past 5 years.
"I'll probably go get lifted right now with Greg. Hey, and come back tomorrow and try to get another win."
-Renaldo
by solanumbrella on May 14, 2008 10:23 PM EDT 0 recs
beasley
i know that PG (rose) is the main need but beasley is going to be a perennial all-star. i’d be thrilled if the knicks had either one of those guys it’s after #2 that there’s a drop-off. i don’t think there is much difference talent-wise between bayless, mayo, gordon, arthur, randolph, the euro guys etc.
i’d agree with trading down, but only if it a) got the knicks another late first round pick, or b) got them a young player (either starter or starter potential) in return. i’m not as eager to shed contracts right now because marbury comes off the books next year, and some more expire before 2010 – that’s the offseason that the knicks have to worry about freeing up cap space for.
Ewing with the step...YES! and the foul!
by Anthony Masons Haircut on May 16, 2008 11:16 AM EDT 0 recs
trading down would be great
especially if we could still get Augustine. This guy is a great fit in the D’Antoni offense. Hell, the guy even said he’s tried to model his game after Nash.
by davidvangorp on May 16, 2008 12:20 PM EDT 0 recs
Beasley is a beast...
Okay, two different scenario presented: If the Knicks get the top pick, that might be bad. They should choose Rose over B-easy, but passing over a stud like Beasley might come back to bite them. Plus the local media will have a field day reminding everyone that the Knicks passed up on Beasley, if he becomes a great pro (even if Rose is very good).
The best scenario is the Knicks get the #2 pick, and pick up whichever one is left.
Any other pick (#3 down to #8), and I have no problem with the Knicks trading down, as long as they get something good in return, and/or dump dump some heavy long-range contracts (Randolph being the most obvious).
by stopmikelupica on May 18, 2008 9:03 PM EDT 0 recs
I was about to propose...
the scenario in which we manage to get the top pick. What are the odds that we select Beasley over Rose? How would people feel about that? I for one would be enraged…
by SamH on
May 18, 2008 10:51 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Rage on
I agree. Considering the pieces we already have, I want Rose or I want to trade out—even if it is Beasley. If we can package Curry and Beasley in a trade down to later in the top 10, get Augustine and some expiring contracts to position ourselves for ‘10, I think I’d be okay with that.
I am SOOOOOOOOOOO afraid that Beasley is Derrick Coleman. It’s just sooo easy for him, and I’m not sure I believe that we have the right people on the team to shepherd him through the culture change. For some reason, I don’t have these reservations about Rose, and I perceive the risks to be much lower with picks 3 through 10.
Anyway, tomorrow, this may all be moot. Or not….
by OTP on May 20, 2008 11:26 AM EDT 0 recs
Well then
Marbury’s contract/#6 pick/whoever else they want to Chicago for the rights to Derrick Rose (although I think they’ll take Beasley, so maybe we’d trade with Miami). Do they bite?
jeterchrist.blogspot.com
by Dachs on May 20, 2008 8:33 PM EDT 0 recs
New FanPost