Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: The Knicks would have been...

Voters
25. You may not vote on this poll
  • Contending with either Lee or Z-Bo

    6 24.00%
  • better with Lee or Z-Bo, but just an early-exit playoff team

    18 72.00%
  • Would have been no better.

    1 4.00%
  • Woudl have been worse.

    0 0%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Windsor, Earth's Rectum (as reported by Stephen Colbert).
    Posts
    7,322
    vCash
    1500

    The Knicks, David Lee, Zach Randolph and Amare Stoudemire

    Going back to the summer of 2010, when LBJ hit the free agent marker, the Knicks were shedding contracts to make room for LeBron.

    Hindsight is 20/20, but there were going to be several power forwards on the marker: Amare and Bosh were at the top of the list, but the Knicks already had Lee.

    Had the Knicks kept Lee, they would have still had an All-Star power forward, and one without a history of injuries.

    I will freely admit that Amare in his prime was a better player than Lee and Randolph, but at the time the Suns were even unwilling to give this guy a contract long-term and they have the best rehab guys in the league.

    The Knicks passed up on Z-Bo and Lee in favour of Amare. Though I realize they were clearing cap space for LBJ, they did have room to sign two players, so keeping either Z-Bo (who was moved in 2008) or Lee (who was moved 2010).

    Considering how well Lee and Z-Bo are playing now, would the Knicks have been better off keep Lee or Z-Bo? Or would they still be treading water? Would either have made that big a difference?
    What the eye doesn't see and the mind doesn't know, doesn't exist.
    Follow me on Twitter and I'll follow back: @JasonJHorn

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    7,750
    vCash
    1500
    I remember at the time thinking it was stupid to trade Lee to make room for another PF. Granted Amare was a way better player then but still that's a lot of money for a position that you already had covered with a 20-10 guy.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10,914
    vCash
    1500
    Hindsight is 20/20 at the time everybody was calling Lee's contract horrendous and anybody would laugh if you said you would take Z-BO over Amare. What they should have done is let D'Antoni and Walsh handle there own business. They probably would have landed CP3.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Tunisia
    Posts
    2,929
    vCash
    1500
    I think teams need to keep what ever decent talent they have and try to build chemistry with that group. That's how teams win. Improve within.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,141
    vCash
    1500
    didn't zbo play for the Nix for a couple of seasons?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    20,467
    vCash
    1500
    a lot better

    Quote Originally Posted by NYSpirit1 View Post
    The Knicks were never this bad of a team. They always have been a 48-50 win team stuck in what was a 21-40 team's body.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,035
    vCash
    1000
    Quote Originally Posted by blahblahyoutoo View Post
    didn't zbo play for the Nix for a couple of seasons?
    I don't think he did play but was acquired by the Grizz before he played. However I could be wrong and he was there a season. Knicks fans could tell better.
    "You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime, you might find, you get what you need"



    COME ON ,MEMPHIS !!!! KEEP CALM,PLAY HARD AND CARRY ON !!!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,910
    vCash
    1500
    Any other team save the Knicks would have just kept Lee. Similar production, better passer, younger, healtheir and could have been had for cheaper.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    20,467
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mzgrizz View Post
    I don't think he did play but was acquired by the Grizz before he played. However I could be wrong and he was there a season. Knicks fans could tell better.
    he played a lot with the Knicks....I still remember those airballs

    Quote Originally Posted by NYSpirit1 View Post
    The Knicks were never this bad of a team. They always have been a 48-50 win team stuck in what was a 21-40 team's body.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    LI-NY
    Posts
    22,858
    vCash
    1500
    If we keep Melo and retool around him and eventually build a contender, the Amare signing was worth it. Melo wasn't coming to play with Lee. Obviously right now that looks laughable but in my eyes, saying "was it worth it" is contingent around what we can do with Melo. They are all dominos that were started with STAT.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SL, UT
    Posts
    1,494
    vCash
    1500
    Memphis turned Randolph's career and head around. Having him next to Carmello he'd still be one of the most hated players in the league and I doubt ever as good as he's been playing next to Gasol.
    don't let it go to your head big fella

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,080
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNumber37 View Post
    Any other team save the Knicks would have just kept Lee. Similar production, better passer, younger, healtheir and could have been had for cheaper.
    Kept Lee and continued winning 23 games a yr...same thing was happening when Randolph was starting here. Lee is only one yr younger than Amare. Amare was 27 when he was signed here. Let's not forget how the Knicks went from a 23 win team to a .500 team going from Lee to Amare. Also, keeping Lee most likely meant no Melo and no Chandler. When you're winning 23 games a yr for a decade, changes need to happen.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    20,467
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by D-Leethal View Post
    If we keep Melo and retool around him and eventually build a contender, the Amare signing was worth it. Melo wasn't coming to play with Lee. Obviously right now that looks laughable but in my eyes, saying "was it worth it" is contingent around what we can do with Melo. They are all dominos that were started with STAT.
    Are you serious? really worth it?

    Knicks are in the bottom end of the league and have the worst contract in the NBA.

    You gotta be kidding me with this stuff

    Quote Originally Posted by NYSpirit1 View Post
    The Knicks were never this bad of a team. They always have been a 48-50 win team stuck in what was a 21-40 team's body.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    10,359
    vCash
    500
    Amare was a much better #1 option than Lee.

    Lee only works if they are still able to get Chandler and Carmelo. In that scenario, yes, they are a better team.

    I'm going to disregard ZBO because maturity wise he needed to get traded around and find a disciplined coach and organization before he could truly become a viable #1 option.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    24,452
    vCash
    1461
    Some Knicks fans truly believe 'Melo came to New York to play with Amar'e... That Amar'e was the deciding factor.. How laughably naive..

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •