My bad. Anyways, I still don't see any reason to go after Lee. This just doesn't make any sense...like...at all.
You would rather have Portland get no one than get a starting-quality guy? I'm not saying that if Portland doesn't get Lee then they won't get anyone, but I don't think that there's NO reason to pursue him. He's a good player and he would help the team more than adding no one to the roster with our cap space. Ed O.
I'd lowball him. This guy won't play more than 12-15 minutes unless we move one of Joel/LA/Oden, and he wants a shitload of money. I'd offer something, but not close to what he wants. I'd rather put all the money on Odom.
I agree with Ed. However, I think going after Odom would be a smarter move. Lee will create a log jam. He's too good not to play 30 min. or more; LaMarcus is obviously too good not to play 30+ minutes as well.
If it was Lee or no one, I'd certainly take Lee. Trade him down the line, trade Aldridge if a star point guard became available...it opens up options that don't slam shut on July 1 next season. But Lee is definitely not atop my list of priorities.
Portland needs a second distributor. Portland needs someone to defend a point guard. They don't have to be the same player to me, but they do have to start. That's what I want. David Lee will do neither of those things. Portland does need a banger on offense under the basket, and he can do that. But if that's so important that we need to give someone $50 million, then Portland needs to get rid of the folks they already have that should be doing that. I don't want to do that. I think the first two needs I listed are a priority. Portland can already rebound. Portland needs to defend the perimeter, and they need better ball movement. If we get David Lee, who is basically Zach Randolph without the baggage, for $50 million dollars then we'd better be ready to commit to him, because nobody should pay a bench player that much. And quite frankly, he's not worth that much money. He's not. Nobody else is going to pay him that. Nobody wants to trade for that and give you something of value later. He'd only get moved for an expiring deal to a team that wants to win now. If it happens, I'll make the best of it, but I don't want to see us give him a big contract if we think we're going to move him later, because that's not going to work out as well as we think it might.
All great points. David Lee isn't worth $50 million even if we needed him to start, but to pay him that much to backup LMA would be crazy. Odom, Miller, Kidd, and Sessions would all be better choices than Lee. Even paying a guy like Brandon Bass 5 years, $25-$30 million would be much smarter than paying Lee $50 million for 5 years.
David Lee at $50 million over 5 years is not the answer for this team. It would be ludicrous if we got that guy for that much.
lee would be cool....... IF WE NEEEEEEEDED HIM!!!!!!! COME ON PEOPLE SERIOUSLY. WE HAVE LAMARCUS ALDRIDGE!!!!!!! AND GREG MOTHER FUCKING ODEN. DAVID LEE IS A STARTER. If your trying to make greg oden the new/current 6th man than come on david lee. But other wise he is not needed.
I can think of a bunch of teams that need a good center, and would pay to get one. HOU, for one...who just happens to have Shane Battier almost redundant now that they've signed Ariza, and no center. Getting Lee allows you to trade Joel for Battier, so for a bit of a downgrade at backup 4/5 on defense you get a big production upgrade at the 3 (esp. on defense). Then you have a stable of Blake/Bayless/Outlaw/Webs/Batum? (4-8M in expirings, Webs is probably untradeable, except for a behemothly bad contract, two rookie-scale players) to choose from set up a trade for a pretty good PG. For instance, Blake/Bayless/Batum/Outlaw sends out 8M in expiring contracts and 3M in rookie-scale contributors. "Stable rotation" PG Upgrade?/Bayless or Blake/Mills Roy/Rudy Battier/Batum?/Cunningham LMA/Lee/Pendergraph Oden/LMA
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/rumors/...t=AoqkFQ29.7Hi3k7rd8grAF28vLYF?urn=nba,174730 More bullcrap from the NYP.
If we can get Lee for $6 million/year AND still get Miller through S&T, it would soften the sting of losing out on Hedo/Artest/Ariza in my opinion.
Why? The team is going to be over the cap one way or the other... why not get the best possible player? I can see an argument for another position--and, trust me, I'd prefer adding Odom or Marvin Williams or Shawn Marion--but I don't understand why you'd rather have an inferior player simply to save Paul Allen some money. Ed O.
Because I think the key to long-term success in the NBA is to not overpay your players or put them in a position where the league will not value them for the amount they are under contract. How many success stories can you think of where a team signs a player to $10 million+/year contract to be their backup? I can't think of any. If it has happened, it certainly isn't the norm. The types of teams that might do such a thing would be the Knicks and Mavs. Sure the Mavs made a push, but then they really hampered their flexibility by loading up on bad contracted they can't move. Now, they have to really overpay for old players and are a few years away from having to blow it all up. You don't see teams like the Spurs signing FA's for $50 million with the purpose of playing them 15mpg or less.
OK. I guess we disagree. Contract length and salary are secondary to winning basketball games. I'd rather have David Lee on my team--at any price--than Bass (who's not a bad player). I don't think that acquiring David Lee at 5 years, $50m will hamper Portland in any way. The contract would not prevent Portland from re-signing its own players nor from using the MLE as needed, IMO. Further, I think that Lee's contract would be entirely reasonable given his age and abilities. Portland would be able to trade him relatively easily at any point allowed under the CBA. The Clippers were just able to give away Zach Randolph for an expiring contract, for crying out loud... you think Portland would have any issues getting value for David Lee? Ed O.
The only way getting Lee makes sense would be if other moves came immediately afterwards. But it isn't clear to me what they would be targeting in that case. Lee doesn't do anything to take some of the burden off of Roy. Lee doesn't do anything to address the horrific perimeter defense. Lee doesn't make LA or Oden better while on the floor. In short, Lee doesn't do anything that Portland actually needs. He would be a way for KP to save face. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't care about wasting Paul Allen's money very much. But signing Lee would have completely wasted this last opportunity for Portland to add a quality, needed piece. Trading Joel to make room for Lee is absurd. Joel is far more valuable to Portland then Lee ever would be. We need Joel as insurance at center for at least another year. Lee would be a piss poor substitute. Targeting Hedo didn't thrill me, but I could understand the idea behind it and felt it could work. Lee just makes zero sense no matter how I look at it.
Yes, I do. I think another area where we differ, is how much we value Lee. I think Lee is overrated around the league. Much like Zach, he seems to get a lot of empty stats. Does he collect a lot of rebounds? Yes, because his other 4 teammates are heading down the court. Does he score with a decent percentage? Yes, but mainly because he has 4 perimeter shooters that either drive and dump to him or where he runs the pick and roll, slashing right down the middle of the key where there is no help, again because of the shooters. I don't see why Brandon Bass couldn't slide into the Knicks system and do almost the exact same thing Lee did. I'd rather sign a guy to a GOOD contract instead of what that we don't think will hurt us. When it comes down to it, we're always going to want flexibility. I don't want a guy like Lee where with his contract, the best thing we'll get in return is an all but retired Q-Rich. I want our guys to have value around the league. Again, I think our main difference comes from the fact that we simply value Lee differently. I think there are a handful of players left in FA that help us more than him at an equal or less contract.
