<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">1. Injuries are the reason we weren't in the playoffs. When we were healthy we had a 7-8th seed. 2. Whoever the Knicks give up, it won't be Curry and Marbury. 3. Kobe, Curry, and Marbury will be the best 3-man tandem in the league and easily a playoff contender.</div> Lakers had injury problems they made it.
Going from Phil Jackson to Isiah Thomas - huge, huge downgrade. Don't think Kobe would want any part of that. BTW: I wonder how the Knicks would have done in the Western Conference.....playoffs? Highly unlikely even if they were at full strength.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Dude, you have arguable the worst GM in the league and are already guard-heavy. Kobe would push you guys into the playoffs, but you wouldn't be championship contenders.</div> lol, does that matter? If you have a chance to acquire one of the best players in NBA history, you go for it. Our guards are: Marbury, Crawford, Francis, Robinson, and Collins. <u>ALL</u> of them are expendable and at least two will be included in any Kobe deal. And if not immediate championship contenders, you certainly can't rule out the near future. <div class="quote_poster">lakersfan171 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Lakers had injury problems they made it.</div> That's a huge cop out - the Lakers' main injuries were to Odom, Walton, and Brown. That doesn't really add up to Crawford, Lee, Richardson, and Francis. <div class="quote_poster">Eclipse Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Going from Phil Jackson to Isiah Thomas - huge, huge downgrade. Don't think Kobe would want any part of that. BTW: I wonder how the Knicks would have done in the Western Conference.....playoffs? Highly unlikely even if they were at full strength.</div> Kobe said he would play for them when Isiah was running the team, so clearly Isiah has nothing to do with Kobe's willingness to be in New York. Isiah isn't even a bad coach either.
Knicks if they were 100% and made the playoffs they would have had swept. Getting Kobe still wouldn't get pass the first round. I'm sure the Lakers will ask for either Curry or Marbury with Francis.
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">lol, does that matter? If you have a chance to acquire one of the best players in NBA history, you go for it. Our guards are: Marbury, Crawford, Francis, Robinson, and Collins. <u>ALL</u> of them are expendable and at least two will be included in any Kobe deal. And if not immediate championship contenders, you certainly can't rule out the near future.</div> That's not an argument for not acquiring Kobe. Its an argument for Kobe not wanting to go to NY. Your most attractive assets are the two young forwards and draft picks, so if a trade did happen why would Kobe want to share the ball with all those guards and join a team where Eddy Curry would most likely be the team's best rebounder and post defender? Its a downgrade in almost every aspect. Crappier front office. Crappier coach. Crappier roster. Also, the Lakers injury problems were just as bad, if not worse, than the Knicks'.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">That's a huge cop out - the Lakers' main injuries were to Odom, Walton, and Brown. That doesn't really add up to Crawford, Lee, Richardson, and Francis.</div> Chris Mihm was out for the whole season, he's our number one center. Odom is the number two guy and Brown is the first choice PF. So we had two starters that played consistently throughout the season. One the two starters is Smush Parker. Also, lets not forget that the Knicks are in the East as well. They played easier teams much more and could enter the playoffs with a record below .500. You have no chance of doing that in the West.
<div class="quote_poster">lakersfan171 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Knicks if they were 100% and made the playoffs they would have had swept. Getting Kobe still wouldn't get pass the first round. I'm sure the Lakers will ask for either Curry or Marbury with Francis.</div> Even if you say the Knicks wouldn't have won the series, how do you know they would have gotten swept? They played well against both teams (Pistons, Cavaliers) during the regular season.
Kobe isn't going to the Knicks. That is the most unlikely scenario. He has more chance going to the Raptors, becuase they have more to offer. Kobe wants to leave becuase he doesn't have the correct tools around him. To GET Kobe the Knicks have to give up tools, Kobe needs, like a good centre and solid PG. Then he is in a worse situation then before with an even WORSE front office. This trade is way to unlikely.
MrJ: You need to stop being such a homer. You're overvaluing your players and the team. If the Knicks don't give up two of their best players in a trade, what other trades do you propose for them to get the best player in the NBA? Remember that the salaries must match up. The Knicks have so many unattractive players with huge contracts which not many teams want any part of. Even with Kobe, the Knicks will not be a championship contender with Marbury/Curry/Kobe.
<div class="quote_poster">Eclipse Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">MrJ: You need to stop being such a homer. You're overvaluing your players and the team. If the Knicks don't give up two of their best players in a trade, what other trades do you propose for them to get the best player in the NBA? Remember that the salaries must match up. The Knicks have so many unattractive players with huge contracts which not many teams want any part of. Even with Kobe, the Knicks will not be a championship contender with Marbury/Curry/Kobe.</div> That is true the salaries must match up, within 15%.
<div class="quote_poster">Eclipse Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">MrJ: You need to stop being such a homer. You're overvaluing your players and the team. If the Knicks don't give up two of their best players in a trade, what other trades do you propose for them to get the best player in the NBA? Remember that the salaries must match up. The Knicks have so many unattractive players with huge contracts which not many teams want any part of. Even with Kobe, the Knicks will not be a championship contender with Marbury/Curry/Kobe.</div> Thank you. Even if they do get Kobe they won't have enough help to even win 40 games. The Lakers don't want any of those huge contracts MrJ.I'm 100% they would of got swept in the first round. No matter if they do play good against the elite teams playoffs is a another story.
<div class="quote_poster">Eclipse Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">MrJ: You need to stop being such a homer. You're overvaluing your players and the team. If the Knicks don't give up two of their best players in a trade, what other trades do you propose for them to get the best player in the NBA? Remember that the salaries must match up. The Knicks have so many unattractive players with huge contracts which not many teams want any part of. Even with Kobe, the Knicks will not be a championship contender with Marbury/Curry/Kobe.</div> Knicks can give up 3 players for Kobe such as FREY,Francis/Marbury,Lee/Craw which would be enough for him Lakers are crap sorry to break it down to you. look at your damn Bench you have smush parker former D-league player ....I have no idea why Lakers picked his garbage ass up. AND1 material. Sasha Vujici is just pathetic no skills at all. Vlad is pretty good when healthy and he is basically the only guy who can produce off the bench. Now lets look at starting 5 lmao ... Bynum young kid who doesn't know what he is doing there. Brown is like Olowokandi waste of talent. Jordan Farmer is trying to make something happen but he is only a rookie. Odom is pretty good but he is not a leader when Kobe isn't there. He is a type of player who one games puts up 20, 10 and next 10 games 5,2.... I HOPE I made my point! On the other hand we Knicks has a very deep bench one of the best in NBA i WOULD say .... they will produce when the minutes are given to them.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">That's not an argument for not acquiring Kobe. Its an argument for Kobe not wanting to go to NY. Your most attractive assets are the two young forwards and draft picks, so if a trade did happen why would Kobe want to share the ball with all those guards and join a team where Eddy Curry would most likely be the team's best rebounder and post defender?</div> Kobe said himself that he wanted to play for the Knicks even when they were in route to a 33-49 record that season. Share the ball with all those guards? If any trade were to occur, a guard will have to be shipped to LA. Robinson and Collins are on their rookie salaries and are easily expendable. The Knicks guards will also be more than willing to give Kobe the ball. While a poor rebounder/defender, Eddy Curry is still one of the best centers in the league. You also have to factor in when David Lee and Quentin Richardson went down (the Knicks best rebounders), Eddy Curry was their best rebounder and the Knicks still outrebounded their opponents on a nightly basis. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The Lakers injury problems were just as bad, if not worse, than the Knicks'.</div> Odom played 56 games Walton played 60 games Kwame played 42 games Mihm was out for the season Crawford played 58 games Francis played 44 games Lee played 56 games Robinson played 64 games Quentin Richardson played 49 games I would consider the injuries worse to the Knicks. More key players were injured on the Knicks than on the Lakers. <div class="quote_poster">Eclipse Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">MrJ: You need to stop being such a homer. You're overvaluing your players and the team. If the Knicks don't give up two of their best players in a trade, what other trades do you propose for them to get the best player in the NBA? Remember that the salaries must match up. The Knicks have so many unattractive players with huge contracts which not many teams want any part of. Even with Kobe, the Knicks will not be a championship contender with Marbury/Curry/Kobe.</div> That's the whole point! The Knicks can't just give up their best players for Kobe because it will just overnatch (salary-wise) anything the Lakers have to offer.
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Kobe said himself that he wanted to play for the Knicks even when they were in route to a 33-49 record that season. Share the ball with all those guards? If any trade were to occur, a guard will have to be shipped to LA. Robinson and Collins are on their rookie salaries and are easily expendable. The Knicks guards will also be more than willing to give Kobe the ball. While a poor rebounder/defender, Eddy Curry is still one of the best centers in the league. You also have to factor in when David Lee and Quentin Richardson went down (the Knicks best rebounders), Eddy Curry was their best rebounder and the Knicks still outrebounded their opponents on a nightly basis. Odom played 56 games Walton played 60 games Kwame played 42 games Mihm was out for the season Crawford played 58 games Francis played 44 games Lee played 56 games Robinson played 64 games Quentin Richardson played 49 games I would consider the injuries worse to the Knicks. More key players were injured on the Knicks than on the Lakers.</div> All of the Knicks bench are crap they can't make no shots. You think the Knicks are good but your just dreaming your overvaluing your players that are pretty much no good.
<div class="quote_poster">lakersfan171 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">All of the Knicks bench are crap they can't make no shots. You think the Knicks are good but your just dreaming your overvaluing your players that are pretty much no good.</div> Nate Robinson 10+ PPG David Lee 10+PPG 10 Rebounce Jamal Craw 18PPG 5or4ast this ist just from top of my head....
<div class="quote_poster">lakersfan171 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Thank you. Even if they do get Kobe they won't have enough help to even win 40 games. The Lakers don't want any of those huge contracts MrJ.I'm 100% they would of got swept in the first round. No matter if they do play good against the elite teams playoffs is a another story.</div> Now you're just being ridiculous. Had the Knicks kept relatively healthy for the season they could have won 40 games. So by adding Kobe we can't win 40 games? I can see you saying they won't be championship contenders, but not being able to win 40 games is untrue. How are you 100% sure the Knicks would have gotten swept in the playoffs? <div class="quote_poster">lakersfan171 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">All of the Knicks bench are crap they can't make no shots. You think the Knicks are good but your just dreaming your overvaluing your players that are pretty much no good.</div> If you're going to make such a statement, please explain it in a logical manner.
<div class="quote_poster">LBJ2006MVP Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Knicks can give up 3 players for Kobe such as FREY,Francis/Marbury,Lee/Craw which would be enough for him</div> Why would anyone want Francis, a crybaby who whines about playing time but doesn't produce when he gets it, making 16 and 17 million for the next two year no less? Marbury is going to make 20 and 21 million for the next two seasons and really has done nothing in his career to warrant that kind of money. Lee and Frye would be the only players that I would be remotely interested in. Crawford (8, 8,5 milion) - for someone who's only strength is shooting, a 40% career FG% is mediocre. <div class="quote_poster">LBJ2006MVP Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Lakers are crap sorry to break it down to you.</div> And sorry to break it to you but the Knicks are crap as well. The sooner you realize that the better off you'll be. In all seriousness, do you not notice that the only people here that think that the Knicks have a good team and have players that have all this value that other teams want are Knicks fans?
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Now you're just being ridiculous. Had the Knicks kept relatively healthy for the season they could have won 40 games. So by adding Kobe we can't win 40 games? I can see you saying they won't be championship contenders, but not being able to win 40 games is untrue. How are you 100% sure the Knicks would have gotten swept in the playoffs?</div> Because they don't have any good player that a Cleveland or Detroit has no competition. There going to lose mostly all there good players in a Kobe trade so Kobe has no help and no good big man that Kobe will need. Are NBDL team is way better than your "Knick bench". This is Basketball talk.
