Knicks · Lee probably on move? (page 1)

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/Nyal_River/status/1013596191861428224

Click here to view the Tweet

dwiley20 wrote:how ...lee is a 2 how does this move means the end for Lee. The End for Beasely yall mean??

dwiley20 wrote:how ...lee is a 2 how does this move means the end for Lee. The End for Beasely yall mean??

dwiley20 wrote:how ...lee is a 2 how does this move means the end for Lee. The End for Beasely yall mean??

Knicks did just draft and sign two young SF's. At SG: THJr, Dot, Baker.

Last year Knicks were short at SF so Lee/THJr could start and play those positions. Minutes won't be there this year.

Plus, I think it's more about his contact and the 2 years left that the Knicks FO want to move.

Cartman718 wrote:Ok. I'm sure Rockets or Thunder would take him

Lakers get: Kawhi, Kanter
Knicks get: Ball, Randall, Deng
Spurs get: Kuzma, Lee, Lance, THJr. and Lakers' #1

reub wrote:I want to trade Lee in a deal that involves Kawhi to the Lakers.

Lakers get: Kawhi, Kanter
Knicks get: Ball, Randall, Deng
Spurs get: Kuzma, Lee, Lance, THJr. and Lakers' #1

I think involving ourselves in the Lakers-Spurs trade would be the way to go. I don't think your proposal makes sense for either the Spurs or Knicks though. There are too many moving parts and we end up with far too much value without giving up much of anything. At best, we'd be a destination for Loul Deng's contract and an asset but we definitely are not getting the Lakers' best asset (Ball).

Also, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Spurs wanting to jettison ALL their big salaried players like Aldridge, Mills and Gasol.

I thought he could have made a difference for them last year in the playoffs. Better offensive player than Robertson, and a good enough defender to compensate for OKC's loss of a key defender.

I thought the Cavs might have benefited from him last year, too, but that has obviously changed.

dwiley20 wrote:how ...lee is a 2 how does this move means the end for Lee. The End for Beasely yall mean??

Fiz said he plans on having Tim Jr more at the SG and doesn't really see him and Lee as SF's due to their height. Now we're even more overloaded at SG, so why wouldn't we ship out Lee?

WaltLongmire wrote:Agree with the folks who said OKC is the perfect team for Lee, though I don't know whether players and salaries can be matched up...

I thought he could have made a difference for them last year in the playoffs. Better offensive player than Robertson, and a good enough defender to compensate for OKC's loss of a key defender.

I thought the Cavs might have benefited from him last year, too, but that has obviously changed.

I think TWolves would make sense for Lee too- they lost Crawford and need more shooters, plus he's the kind of player Thibs would like. Looking at their series, no one really matches up, unless they did a sign and trade involving Nemanja Bjelica, but that would require giving him a 3 year deal.

Also Sixers will be looking for some more 3pt shooters.

dwiley20 wrote:how ...lee is a 2 how does this move means the end for Lee. The End for Beasely yall mean??

Next season we have:

PG - Ntilikina, Burke, Mudiay
SG - Hardaway Jr, Dotson, Baker
SF - Knox, Williams
PF - Hezonja, Thomas, Hicks, [KP]
C - Kanter, Robinson, Kornet, [Noah]

Obviously Courtney Lee is a good 3-and-D player and shot above 40% from three point range last season. However, he is the wrong side of 30 and unless we aim to compete for the play offs next season, it might not make sense to hold onto him and restrict the minutes of our young collection of guards and forwards. Him and Hardaway are not really ideal small forwards, they can do a job but we might be better off investing in Knox/Hezonja as the starting SF/PF combination, then using Williams off the bench at SF and either Thomas or Hicks at PF. We might even give Dotson some limited minutes at SF depending on the line up if we bring Allonzo Trier into the rotation at SG.

If we can get any picks and an expiring contract in exchange for Courtney Lee it would make sense because he isn't on the same timeline as this roster.

CrushAlot wrote:

dwiley20 wrote:how ...lee is a 2 how does this move means the end for Lee. The End for Beasely yall mean??

The Knicks need to move his salary and they want to give his minutes to younger players. Brass is gone also. Jesus is Lee's guy so this probably happening.

Yeah, just like that Melo to Houston deal lol I think it will happen, but I wouldn't bet on it.

reub wrote:I want to trade Lee in a deal that involves Kawhi to the Lakers.

Lakers get: Kawhi, Kanter
Knicks get: Ball, Randall, Deng
Spurs get: Kuzma, Lee, Lance, THJr. and Lakers' #1

LMAO, yeah good chance this deal happens. Why are the Spurs doing this deal? The Knicks get the best young asset while giving up garbage no one wants

TripleThreat wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:Is there no way to get a mid/late first rounder from somewhere? This guy is a rotation player without any baggage.
We shouldn't look to short sell him. He can definitely add value to a team. If we had to go get a player like him, what would be the odds of landing one without giving up something valuable? As triple threat says lets do that mirror test thingy.

1) Opportunity Cost of the cap space implied

2) Current cap conditions of the league as a whole

Trading a first rounder for Lee would mean losing that cost controlled rookie asset. Then absorbing Lee's contract into their cap, when the non Knicks team could simply spend that 12 million AAV for the next two years in a current marketplace that will shift into a BUYERS MARKET. Lots of money is tied up and teams are cap locked, going to be some good value contract bargains this offseason and next, so 12 million stretches a lot farther.

Would any of you trade a late first rounder ( think like a Chandler Hutchinson type) plus whatever depth can be had for 12 million in free agent money for TWO YEARS for Courtney Lee?

If the Knicks made that kind of deal for Lee, people here would be up in arms. They'd demand someone get fired. So, thus, Mirror Test-ed, why should the non Knicks team do it?

The Knicks have tried to trade Lee pretty much from the time they first signed him. And no one wants him at his current AAV, contract length and hit on opportunity cost implied.

He can't create his own shot. At all. He's in his clear decline phase. He does play solid smart team basketball, but he's at a point, where statistically, you have to expect more missed games/injuries.

Here's the other issue -

NO NON WARRIORS CONTENDER LEVEL TEAM IS GOING INTO THE LUXURY TAX ZONE/OR FURTHER INTO IT/OR FURTHER INTO THE REPEATER TAX ZONE FOR COURTNEY LEE.

The Warriors are deep in the tax zone. Every "contender" level team under them is either in the tax zone or repeater zone or going to enter it.

Would you want the Knicks to go into the repeater tax even further for Courtney Lee?

I don't care how "cash rich" team is in real life, you do have to show some fiscal restraint at some point. If you were a GM of a NBA team, do you think you'd keep your job for long if you had to explain to your owner why you went depth into the luxury tax for Courtney Lee?

The marketplace is going to collapse. Phil Jackson totally f**ked this all up for the Knicks.

Here's a better question, if a team thinks it has a legit shot at a title and Lee could fill an important void on the roster, do you really think a team would pass on him just to save $10M (just a number I pulled out of thin air)? Besides, we would probably need to take on another contract in any transaction (probably fewer years) so I fail to see the financial implications you're claiming.