David Lee Wish List.

The David Lee trade chatter is deafening at this point. Tommy Dee at The Knicks Blog reports that the Blazers have a school girl crush on an Anthony Bonner for David Lee that is on the creepy stalker threshold. He also says that the Bulls and Nuggets are monitoring the situation. I’ve decided to make a wish list of players from each of these teams.

Portland: The Blazers clearly have the best young talent. The Knicks would love to get their hands on any of these guys, who would fit the long term plans and D’Antoni’s style.

  • Travis Outlaw
  • Martell Webster (he’s got a long contract but its real cheap.)
  • Channing Frye (I can still re member that game his rookie year where he shot something like 20/22 from the field. Talk about spacing the floor.)
  • Ike Diogu (if Donnie can get him as a throw-in, why not?)
  • Jerryd Bayless (talented, fast, and a good shooter, but buried on the bench.)
  • Sergio Rodriguez (fast break guard stuck in a half court system.)

Denver: They don’t have a lot of young talent at all. They can mainly offer cap space.

  • Steven Hunter (blah.)
  • Chucky Atkins (blah.)
  • Linas Klieza (nice but will be restricted this year. Resigning him will come cheaper than resigning Lee.)

Chicago: Their horses are mostly busts. They might play better in D’Antoni’s style but are they an improvement over Lee? Also can offer cap space.

  • Larry Hughes (cap space.)
  • Drew Gooden (same, and seems really hurt at the moment.)
  • Derrick Rose (I kid, I kid.)
  • Ty Thomas (he’s been in the league a while now and I think he’s just developmentally disabled. Stromile Swift 2.)
  • Jo Noah (intriguing. Hustler like Lee but also blocks shots. Apparently still has some growing up to do.)
  • Thabo Sefolosha (Versatile 6’5 2 guard who can score. Can’t find time behind Rose, Gordon, Hughes, Deng and Nocioni.)

No matter what we get in terms of players, it would be really nice to grab a draft pick or two, considering the fact that we don’t have one next year. Like Jon, I think Donnie is about to pull a heist.


  1. Heri

    You trade Lee and the least you better do is pull a heist after the Zack for the retiring heart failure trade and bulging disc draft pick. I won’t even mention the Marbury management and the value of return. Now comes Lee?

  2. Dan L

    As you know Heri, I disagree with you about Zach. The fact that Walsh was able to find anyone at all to take on Zach’s contract is a bit of a miracle to me. Anyway, what would you like to see the Knicks get in exchange for Lee?

  3. Italian Stallion

    I think it’s all a matter of perspective. The Knicks were probably a worse team at the end of the Zach/Crawford trades. That became doubly obvious after Mobley was forced to retire. But long term thinkers were happy with the move. Both Zach and Crawford were overpaid. So it was very unlikely that we could build a championship team with their salaries limiting our options going forward. We are now almost certain to be able to sign two players much better than those guys in 2010. The same thinking should be in place when it comes to Lee.

    Lee is a good rebounder, efficient scorer around the basket, and very team oriented player. However, he’s not the complete package as a PF. His defense is mediocre at best, he’s not a shot blocker, and he has no outside shot (though he is improving in both his willingness and ability to take one).

    You aren’t going to get the total package every time and you don’t need every player on your team to be an all-star in order to win it all, but you have to pay your players properly. I can’t say I know exactly what Lee is worth, but I suspect he is overvalued around the league. So if we can improve our long term prospects by making a move we should do it.

    What I don’t want to see is a trade for an aging player that makes us better now at the expense of losing Lee (who we should keep in mind is young and getting a little better). I want draft picks and prospects.

  4. Dan L

    I’m with you on that Stallion. Tommy Dee on The Knicks Blog speculates that Lee could command upwards of 10 million in the open market. That is way too much in my opinion.

  5. Heri

    The riches team in the NBA can afford to throw away a 20 and 10 star because he makes too much money. It’s OK to trade him for a retiring heart problem. We can’t even get a draft pick for him. Pigs fly. You’re right, we disagree.

  6. Italian Stallion


    It’s a salary cap issue.

    The Knicks with Crawford and Zach were miles away from winning it all and the team “couldn’t” add a top free agent because those guys made so much money we were already WAY over the salary cap. It wasn’t a matter of what the team could afford. The rules prevented it.

    Now however, they have the cap room to sign somone BETTER than Zach in 2010. If they can move Curry’s salary (another overpaid player), they will be so far under the cap they can bring in TWO guys like James, Wade, Bosch etc…

    It’s a rule issue.

    Of course it would have been better if Mobley didn’t have a heart issue because we would have had his services for two years and would be a better team now, but he was never part of the long term plan anyway.

    What you have to realize is that the organization is WILLING to sacrifice wins now in order to have a better chance to win it all later.

  7. Dan L

    Well said Stallion. I could be wrong, but I think the Knicks can already sign two max stars, assuming they don’t extend Lee and Nate. If they trade Curry and Jeffries, they can extend Lee and Nate AND sign two guys. Please see this post: http://www.knicksfan.net/?p=37 , which discusses these issues. Let me know if I’m off on anything there.

  8. Italian Stallion

    I believe you are right. If they don’t resign Lee/Nate to big contracts they can get 2 max contracts.

Post a comment

You may use the following HTML:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>