Busy day for the Knicks

[DeToxRox]

Crawford to GS for Harringinton and Randolph and Collins to the Clip Show for Thomas and Mobley.

LeBron must love it the moves being made just for him.

[bignej]

If Lebron leaves Cleveland, I will never watch professional basketball again.

[DaddyTorgo]

it'd be great if after all this lebron just didn't leave cleveland

[Chief Rum]

I think the Knicks are doing it for Dwayne Wade or Chris Bosh, personally. That's who they're counting on. If they get LeBron, great. But they only lose if they get no one.

[Galaxy]

When does the CBA expire?

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I think the Knicks are doing it for Dwayne Wade or Chris Bosh, personally. That's who they're counting on. If they get LeBron, great. But they only lose if they get no one.

Agreed. LeBron gets talked about the most when the Knicks or Nets make moves but I don't think he's considered as attainable as it's made out to be.

IMO, Lebron is the most likely to stay where he is, with Wade a close second. Lebron has a competitive team, and Cleveland is willing to jump through hoops for him to keep it that way, by 2010 he may already have a ring. As far as Wade, I just don't see a lot of reasons for him to leave Miami unless they are still really awful in 2010. He has a ring already, Miami loves him and he gets a ton of endorsements also.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

From what I've read Bosh loves Toronto and is likely to stay.

[Lathum]

I hope they all go to Europe

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

From what I've read Bosh loves Toronto and is likely to stay.

Do you think that cities like Toronto have a hard time attracting US talent across the border?

Cool blog posted by Mark Cuban back in May looking forward to the next few years.

http://blogmaverick.com/2008/05/02/talking-mavs/

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Do you think that cities like Toronto have a hard time attracting US talent across the border?

As opposed to US talent inside the border?

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I see several 130-105 losses in the future.

Now about the dead weight clogging up the end of the bench...

[Subby]

Donnie Walsh is the man. They'll have a top 3 draft pick and 50m in cap room when the summer of 2010 rolls around.

[Honolulu_Blue]

So, the Knicks have basically made all of these moves to clear cap space for 2010? So for the rest of this season and all of next season the Knicks have resigned to the fact that they will be terrible all for the hopes of bringing in some big name free agents in 2010?

Pathetic.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

So, the Knicks have basically made all of these moves to clear cap space for 2010? So for the rest of this season and all of next season the Knicks have resigned to the fact that they will be terrible all for the hopes of bringing in some big name free agents in 2010?

Pathetic.

I don't think it is pathetic. IT sucks for their fans for the next few years, but they are one of a few franchises who don't have to worry about ticket sales.

Do you really think they would be better off with thos guys 2 years from now? They suck anyway and aren't going anywhere, so whats the difference?

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I don't think it is pathetic. IT sucks for their fans for the next few years, but they are one of a few franchises who don't have to worry about ticket sales.

Do you really think they would be better off with thos guys 2 years from now? They suck anyway and aren't going anywhere, so whats the difference?

I just find it incredibly lame.

This is easily one of the lamer sports moves I've ever seen.

If it was this point in the season in 2009, I could probably understand it. But to throw TWO entire seasons? LAME.

[Tyrith]

It's not like they made the team drastically worse in order to clear salary cap space. The Knicks didn't get any better, but I don't think they're going to lose 10 more games because of these trades. This team was already pretty bad anyway.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I just find it incredibly lame.

This is easily one of the lamer sports moves I've ever seen.

If it was this point in the season in 2009, I could probably understand it. But to throw TWO entire seasons? LAME.

Yeah, but do you think somebody just called the Knicks out of the blue and they made these deals? They have been working these a while and you have to strike while the iron is hot.

What do they gain by finishing 5 games under .500 this year then hoping they can dump these contracts between now and then. It's not like they had any chance of contending.

IMO this is the best move the knicks have made since drafting Patrick Ewing.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Yeah, but do you think somebody just called the Knicks out of the blue and they made these deals? They have been working these a while and you have to strike while the iron is hot.

What do they gain by finishing 5 games under .500 this year then hoping they can dump these contracts between now and then. It's not like they had any chance of contending.

IMO this is the best move the knicks have made since drafting Patrick Ewing.

Well, since removing Isiah Thomas.

[Gary Gorski]

Great move for the Knicks - not only do they have cap relief coming now but really, how much worse can this make them? Harrington's not a bad player and definitely used to running and gunning from Golden State and they did the next to impossible of unloading Zach Randolph's contract. They weren't a playoff team before these trades and they're not now. With D'Antoni's system they'll run and gun to enough victories to keep from being pathetic like OKC. They've been terrible for a while now - what's another season or two if they're actually making moves to eventually get better rather than just piling up more stupid moves to ensure their long term futility?

[Chief Rum]

Question about Randolph (as a Clips fan).

Obviously, it's always easy to get excited about a player putting up 20-12, which is even better than what we were getting at times from Brand just two years ago, and moving Cat also means a lot more time for our star rookie guard at the 2.

But we're talking Zach Randolph here, he of Jailblazer fame. There's still a stigma attached to him in my mind. He says he's 27 now and he's more mature and he's not about that anymore. And I don't recall hearing of any bad stories about him while he was in New York (which seemed like a recipe for disaster when the Knicks got him last year). But maybe I just wasn't paying attention. What do New York people think of Zach Randolph, now, the player and the person, as opposed to the kid that was getting in trouble in Portland?

[Anthony]

we didn't get Zach the Jailblazer. really all of last year he was under the radar thanks to Isaiah stealing all the headlines. this is more of a "Zach, we hardly knew ye" kinda thing cuz you really had to be very knowledgeable about basketball to know how good of a player Zach was. chalk it up to NY getting a player from the Northwest region. if this was a Dwayne Wade/Paul Pierce kind of aquisition then there'd be more to say/miss. he came, did his job (and did it better this season than last) and was traded. a very neutral player, which i think played in the Knicks' favor since they were trading a Zach Randolph with a blank slate than Zach Randolph "we don't know if he's going to revert to his negative ways like in Portland". we took the risk and it paid off and that's why we were able to trade him. i don't speak for all of NYC but the fact that he didn't make any headlines was a very good thing for him. maybe if the Knicks were more of a contender it'd be different, its not like the early to mid 90's anymore when they were the cock of the walk. this is Yankees (blech!) and football country these days.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Obviously, it's always easy to get excited about a player putting up 20-12, which is even better than what we were getting at times from Brand just two years ago, and moving Cat also means a lot more time for our star rookie guard at the 2.

Zach Randolph has the most misleading 20 and 10 in the NBA. Brand put up his numbers while shooting over 50% from the floor while Randolph has shot around 45% the past few seasons. On top of that he plays zero defense (0.3 blocked shots per game over his career?), isn't anywhere near as active on the offensive boards (about 1.5 rebounds less than Brand there per game), and he's a black hole on offense. He's also started to see himself as a 3 point threat over the past couple seasons even though he shoots less than 30% from behind the arc.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Obviously, it's always easy to get excited about a player putting up 20-12, which is even better than what we were getting at times from Brand just two years ago,

Don't be mislead by his 20/12. #1 he was in the D'Antoni "try to score 150 points a game" offense and #2 he's joining Camby and Kaman on that front line already so his stats are going to take a hit.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I just find it incredibly lame.

This is easily one of the lamer sports moves I've ever seen.

If it was this point in the season in 2009, I could probably understand it. But to throw TWO entire seasons? LAME.

Your problem is with the NBA, not the Knicks. I'd guess only 20% of all NBA trades are made from a strictly talent perspective. This is a league where the Suns have repeatedly SOLD their first round pick and trades are made where a 1st is added in with a player and only a 2nd rounder is acquired. Contracts are everything in the league, the Knicks did a smart thing whether you think it's lame or not.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

Agreed. LeBron gets talked about the most when the Knicks or Nets make moves but I don't think he's considered as attainable as it's made out to be.

IMO, Lebron is the most likely to stay where he is, with Wade a close second. Lebron has a competitive team, and Cleveland is willing to jump through hoops for him to keep it that way, by 2010 he may already have a ring. As far as Wade, I just don't see a lot of reasons for him to leave Miami unless they are still really awful in 2010. He has a ring already, Miami loves him and he gets a ton of endorsements also.

I don't know. Think about being in Lebron's shoes. He could end up being one of the greatest NBA players ever. He'll never get the attention he deserves though in Cleveland. There's just something different about having a superstar in a major city. Think of the attention Garnett got in Minnesota vs Boston.

Plus, I think there are some nice incentives. Isn't there talk of Nike giving him a huge bonus for moving to a bigger market? What other big endorsement deals can he get by being in New York? There are just more money making opportunities in New York for now and his future.

And the Knicks will have a ton of space in 2010. Enough for 2 max contracts. That means not just Lebron coming on board. It could mean Lebron and Bosh. Lebron and Wade. Lebron and Amare. Tough to turn that down. New York will always be a better destination for free agents than Cleveland. If Cleveland doesn't compete in the next couple years, it's tough to say he'll continue to wait it out there.

My guess is that Bosh stays in Toronto, Wade goes to Chicago, Lebron to New York. I think the league is going to push real hard for stars to end up in big cities. They would love to have them along with Kobe in LA for a few seasons.

[bignej]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't know. Think about being in Lebron's shoes. He could end up being one of the greatest NBA players ever. He'll never get the attention he deserves though in Cleveland. There's just something different about having a superstar in a major city. Think of the attention Garnett got in Minnesota vs Boston.

The problem with that comparison is Minnesota was not a good team. He got plenty of attention when his team was successful. Does anyone really think Lebron is getting inadequate attention? He easily takes up 20% of all NBA coverage right now. I would argue he gets more than Kobe who is in a major market already.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Plus, I think there are some nice incentives. Isn't there talk of Nike giving him a huge bonus for moving to a bigger market? What other big endorsement deals can he get by being in New York? There are just more money making opportunities in New York for now and his future.

I have heard this and I hope it isnt true. This shows that it is Nike that runs the league and itseems like a conflict of interest. I do understand that Lebron makes more from his Nike deal then from actually playing basketball.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

And the Knicks will have a ton of space in 2010. Enough for 2 max contracts. That means not just Lebron coming on board. It could mean Lebron and Bosh. Lebron and Wade. Lebron and Amare. Tough to turn that down. New York will always be a better destination for free agents than Cleveland. If Cleveland doesn't compete in the next couple years, it's tough to say he'll continue to wait it out there.

My guess is that Bosh stays in Toronto, Wade goes to Chicago, Lebron to New York. I think the league is going to push real hard for stars to end up in big cities. They would love to have them along with Kobe in LA for a few seasons.

I agree with your assessment about where free agents would want to play. Cleveland doesn't have much to offer unless you are from there, which Lebron is. I am biased in the fact that I am a Cavs fan but is league cool with killing of its smaller markets to accomplish these goals? I guarantee that if Lebron ever does leave Cleveland, pro basketball will be dead there, and they might as well move the team.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by bignej

The problem with that comparison is Minnesota was not a good team. He got plenty of attention when his team was successful. Does anyone really think Lebron is getting inadequate attention? He easily takes up 20% of all NBA coverage right now. I would argue he gets more than Kobe who is in a major market already.

Minnesota was a playoff team almost every year he was there. And yes, Lebron gets attention in Cleveland, but imagine what it is in New York. ESPN would probably dedicate a network to him.

Originally Posted by bignej

I agree with your assessment about where free agents would want to play. Cleveland doesn't have much to offer unless you are from there, which Lebron is. I am biased in the fact that I am a Cavs fan but is league cool with killing of its smaller markets to accomplish these goals? I guarantee that if Lebron ever does leave Cleveland, pro basketball will be dead there, and they might as well move the team.

I agree, it sucks for small markets. I'm not sure how the league can change it though. But I think some small markets have figured out how to work the system. San Antonio has been a perenniel contender. Miami won a Championship and brought in talent. Detroit isn't a huge market and has been one of the more succesful franchises over the past 20 years.

I just look at the whole thing from Lebron's perspective. I see no advantage at all to staying in Cleveland. I also think the attention is a big deal to him. Remember that this is a guy with a giant statue of his head in the entrance to his home. He likes doing things like the ESPYs and being on magazine covers. He's just not a Tim Duncan type who doesn't mind the low-key small market atmosphere.

I personally don't feel there is anyway he stays in Cleveland. I think Cleveland has ruined their opportunity. They should have gone all out. Brought in a Pau Gasol, Kevin Garnett, even Shaq. Taken a big chance. Instead they wasted their money on bad talent. Mo Williams is not going to help Lebron win a title. I feel if they aren't going to go all out to win it, they may as well trade him and be set with young talent for the next 5 years.

[Deattribution]

I think Garnett is a bad example, he's bigger in Boston because they're champions and before that - they were running through the league. In MN, he only had one team capable of making a deep playoff run and even they weren't that great.

I just don't see NY being a huge boost for Lebron, especially when you consider if he makes the jump - he's going to alienate all of Cleveland, plus some people who see him as ditching his home town team who aren't from Cleveland. He's already the face of the league, what more can he become? NY will involve another 2-3 year rebuilding process to boot.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

I think Garnett is a bad example, he's bigger in Boston because they're champions and before that - they were running through the league. In MN, he only had one team capable of making a deep playoff run and even they weren't that great.

I just don't see NY being a huge boost for Lebron, especially when you consider if he makes the jump - he's going to alienate all of Cleveland, plus some people who see him as ditching his home town team who aren't from Cleveland. He's already the face of the league, what more can he become? NY will involve another 2-3 year rebuilding process to boot.

It's not really his hometown. He's from Akron. Not like he grew up on the streets of Cleveland.

I still think it's a huge boost. There will be more media in New York and he's the main story every night. Just his move to New York alone will be one of the biggest stories in NBA history.

And any team Lebron is on is a contender. It's not like Cleveland has anyone on their roster besides Lebron. New York will also have a ton of cap room beyond the Lebron signing. They will have enough room for another max contract. With another lottery pick or two and this team will look nothing like it does now. It's one thing if Cleveland was real good, but without Lebron, they don't win 30 games.

[Mantle2600]

You do realize the Cavs will have enough money to sign LBJ and another max contract if he stays right?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Mantle2600

You do realize the Cavs will have enough money to sign LBJ and another max contract if he stays right?

With all things equal, where would you want to play if you were the best basketball player on the planet?

[bignej]

Im pretty sure Cleveland can offer a bigger contract than anyone else (besides Nike of course)

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Just his move to New York alone will be one of the biggest stories in NBA history.

Biggest and most infamous are two different things. As stated in this thread, it'll effectively end basketball in Cleveland, which is hard to argue.

With all things equal, where would you want to play if you were the best basketball player on the planet?

With all things equal, what's it matter where you play? His contract itsself (the fact it's coming up in 2010) is generating more hype than just being in NY would. And the reason his contract is done that way is for the hype, but also so he can make more $$. If he was so hellbent on playing in NY, or NJ, he could already be there.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

Biggest and most infamous are two different things. As stated in this thread, it'll effectively end basketball in Cleveland, which is hard to argue.

Maybe. But honestly, if a city can only support a basketball team if it has the best player in the league, they probably don't deserve to have a team.

Originally Posted by Deattribution

With all things equal, what's it matter where you play? His contract itsself (the fact it's coming up in 2010) is generating more hype than just being in NY would. And the reason his contract is done that way is for the hype, but also so he can make more $$. If he was so hellbent on playing in NY, or NJ, he could already be there.

We'll see. I think in the end, Lebron will take the fame and attention in New York.

[Deattribution]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Maybe. But honestly, if a city can only support a basketball team if it has the best player in the league, they probably don't deserve to have a team.

I don't think that is the only way they can support a team, but a Lebron James doesn't come to town that often (If ever for some teams). Losing him would be a huge hit to the franchise, and would linger for a while.

Teams like the Lakers can afford losing a Kobe (or a Shaq), cause they're the Lakers but Cleveland is pretty much Lebron James.

[bignej]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Maybe. But honestly, if a city can only support a basketball team if it has the best player in the league, they probably don't deserve to have a team.

We'll see. I think in the end, Lebron will take the fame and attention in New York.

Doesnt deserve to have a team? You're talking about a once in a lifetime player leaving a city and team that was more than willing to pay anything to keep him. Its like he is being stolen from them. Your talking about a city that is almost universally regarded as the most cursed city in sports. The city supported the team before he arrived but it would be damn near impossible to sell tickets if he leaves. What are the fans supposed to get excited over? Getting another top draft pick that will leave for a bigger market? This would be a huge hangover and would leave a horrible taste in the mouths of the fans. Its only fair for them to not support the league in this instance. On a similar note, I wonder what Orlando's ticket sales were like when Shaq left.

Ive been thinking about this talk about size of markets. Without Lebron, Cleveland is a small NBA market no doubt. In my opinion, Lebron dramatically increases their market so they are no longer a Cleveland market but a global market. TV ratings when he plays have no bearing on which city he plays in. He would sell millions of jerseys if he played in Alaska. He sells out other peoples stadiums now. How would that change based on what city he played for? With the internet and everything, I think the market argument for a player of his caliber is overrated.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

As a Knicks fan, I would feel kind of dirty if they go out and buy Lebron.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by bignej

On a similar note, I wonder what Orlando's ticket sales were like when Shaq left.

NBA Home Attendance Totals

Before Shaq
1989-90 41 617,468 15,060 18 wins
1990-91 41 617,668 15,065 31 wins
1991-92 41 621,191 15,151 21 wins

The Shaq years
1992-93 41 621,191 15,151 41 wins
1993-94 41 626,931 15,291 50 wins
1994-95 41 656,410 16,010 57 wins
1995-96 41 707,168 17,248 60 wins

Since Shaq
1996-97 41 687,958 17,199 45 wins
1997-98 41 701,647 17,113 41 wins
1998-99 25 411,091 16,444 33 wins
1999-00 41 576,409 14,059 41 wins
2000-01 41 605,031 14,757 43 wins
2001-02 41 621,121 15,149 44 wins
2002-03 41 605,091 14,778 42 wins
2003-04 41 589,144 14,369 21 wins
2004-05 41 597,942 14,583 36 wins
2005-06 41 638,005 15,561 40 wins
2006-07 41 700,887 17,094 40 wins
2007-08 41 709,346 17,301 52 wins

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by bignej

Doesnt deserve to have a team? You're talking about a once in a lifetime player leaving a city and team that was more than willing to pay anything to keep him. Its like he is being stolen from them. Your talking about a city that is almost universally regarded as the most cursed city in sports. The city supported the team before he arrived but it would be damn near impossible to sell tickets if he leaves. What are the fans supposed to get excited over? Getting another top draft pick that will leave for a bigger market? This would be a huge hangover and would leave a horrible taste in the mouths of the fans. Its only fair for them to not support the league in this instance. On a similar note, I wonder what Orlando's ticket sales were like when Shaq left.

Ive been thinking about this talk about size of markets. Without Lebron, Cleveland is a small NBA market no doubt. In my opinion, Lebron dramatically increases their market so they are no longer a Cleveland market but a global market. TV ratings when he plays have no bearing on which city he plays in. He would sell millions of jerseys if he played in Alaska. He sells out other peoples stadiums now. How would that change based on what city he played for? With the internet and everything, I think the market argument for a player of his caliber is overrated.

You don't "own" Lebron James just because some ping pong balls fell in your favor. You got rights to him for a few years, and then your team signs a contract with him to play for your team. These things are agreements between the two parties. Just as you have an agreement with your employer. They don't own you and you don't owe them anything besides your contractual duty.

And your response goes right into what I was saying. If the only reason you guys show up to the stadium is to root for one player, perhaps your city doesn't deserve a team. Every team in sports has to deal with the loss of a great player at some time. My Chicago Bulls dealt with the loss of Michael Jordan, yet we somehow manage to show up at games. The Packers lost the face of their franchise this year, yet they somehow find a way to fill up their stadium. Those are two extremes in the form of markets too. But what you are saying is that Cleveland can only survive if the best player in the world is on their team. That if he leaves to play somewhere else or decides to retire someday, the cities passion for basketball and the Cavs will go to shit. If that's the case, move the team to a city that will root for the team and the sport, not a single player.

And you can argue whether it matters what city he plays in, but the NBA, his sponsors, and the media feel otherwise. If Garnett, Pierce, and Allen won a title for the Utah Jazz last year, the team wouldn't have gotten half the press they got this past year. Ask yourself why Tim Duncan, arguably the most accomplished and succesful basketball player in the last 10 years receives little to no national attention. Do you think he would be perceived differently if he won those titles for the Knicks? I bet you he would have two more MVPs to his name and a slew of endorsement deals.

I bet any casual sports fan can tell you who the captain of the '94 Stanley Cup Champion Rangers team was. I bet you only a handful could tell you the captain of last years champion. Winning a championship in a big city like New York simply matters more. Sure it's not fair, but it's reality. Lebron knows that winning in Cleveland makes him a star, but winning in New York makes him a legend.

[Groundhog]

Why go out and grab a high profile coach if you are going to tank for 2 seasons? Why not just get in some no-name coach or former player, let him weather the storm for 2 years, then sack him in time for the rebuild year?

[Logan]

Well for one, the money that it cost for D'Antoni is nothing to the team. Two, they brought him in to implement his system, and you can't do it overnight. The hope is that the system attracts talent as much as the city will. Three, this team wasn't winning anyway as constituted.

[Bigsmooth]

On NBA Gametime (or whatever it's called), Jalen Rose basically guaranteed that Lebron and Bosh are gearing up to sign with the Knicks together. I'd consider Rose a pretty solid source with real connections inside the league. That being said, a lot can happen in 2 years. I mean, if the Supes can be stolen from Seattle after 40 years, anything can happen in the friggin NBA.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Bigsmooth

On NBA Gametime (or whatever it's called), Jalen Rose basically guaranteed that Lebron and Bosh are gearing up to sign with the Knicks together. I'd consider Rose a pretty solid source with real connections inside the league. That being said, a lot can happen in 2 years. I mean, if the Supes can be stolen from Seattle after 40 years, anything can happen in the friggin NBA.

Let's not forget the European route, either. If a Russian team is seriously willing to throw $50m tax free at LeBron James it wont matter how much cap space the Knicks have.

I still think LeBron will stay a Cav when all is said and done. The Knicks would obviously have him #1 on their list, but there are a lot of guys available in 2010 that would make a nice consolation prize.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Let's not forget the European route, either. If a Russian team is seriously willing to throw $50m tax free at LeBron James it wont matter how much cap space the Knicks have.

There's not a chance in hell LeBron goes to Russia, at least not until his career is nearing a close.

[Groundhog]

For $50m tax-free? He's already said in an interview that he'd be crazy not to do it if an offer like that came through.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by bignej

Doesnt deserve to have a team? You're talking about a once in a lifetime player leaving a city and team that was more than willing to pay anything to keep him. Its like he is being stolen from them. Your talking about a city that is almost universally regarded as the most cursed city in sports. The city supported the team before he arrived but it would be damn near impossible to sell tickets if he leaves. What are the fans supposed to get excited over? Getting another top draft pick that will leave for a bigger market? This would be a huge hangover and would leave a horrible taste in the mouths of the fans. Its only fair for them to not support the league in this instance. On a similar note, I wonder what Orlando's ticket sales were like when Shaq left.

Ive been thinking about this talk about size of markets. Without Lebron, Cleveland is a small NBA market no doubt. In my opinion, Lebron dramatically increases their market so they are no longer a Cleveland market but a global market. TV ratings when he plays have no bearing on which city he plays in. He would sell millions of jerseys if he played in Alaska. He sells out other peoples stadiums now. How would that change based on what city he played for? With the internet and everything, I think the market argument for a player of his caliber is overrated.

Where do you come up with this? If he wants to leave, why on earth shouldn't he? Stolen seems to indicate he's property - that's absurd.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

For $50m tax-free? He's already said in an interview that he'd be crazy not to do it if an offer like that came through.

He cares about being an icon. To do that, he needs to be on American media.

[bignej]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Where do you come up with this? If he wants to leave, why on earth shouldn't he? Stolen seems to indicate he's property - that's absurd.

Thats just my bias showing through

[Gary Gorski]

I think that if the Cavs front office could have shown the ability to give him some help to win championsihps that the probability of him going elsewhere becomes much less. They've had since 2003 to do something and what have they gotten him? Great draftees like Luke Jackson (could have had Biendris, Al Jefferson or Josh Smith) - big time trades for the likes of an aged Ben Wallace? Bringing in Mo Williams and Delonte West via trade were good moves but that just happened now. What I can't figure out is why they never did anything to clear cap space. What more of a selling point do you need to a free agent than come and play with Lebron? Instead they've got 30 million locked up in Ben Wallace, Anderson Varejao, Sasha Pavlovic and Daniel Gibson next season and almost half of that is Ben.

If Cleveland loses Lebron that's on them. Unlike baseball where a small market team can't pay what the Yankees can pay the Cavs will be able to offer the maximum possible to Lebron even if other teams do clear enough cap space to offer the same amount and the Cavs don't have to do anything to their cap to do it either. It shouldn't have taken that long to realize what they had in James and they should have started right then and there clearing out everything crappy to build around him for the next decade.

[TroyF]

1) Bron is as good as gone. I don't see how he doesn't leave for a bigger market. He wants to be in NY or LA. i just can't see him not going for it.

2) I think the Clippers are about as bizzare as it gets for a basketball team now. If I had to list a top 10 "selfish" players grouping, the Clippers would have three guys on the list. Davis and Randolph on offense mixed with Camby on defense. (how'd you like Camby's defense on the pick and roll against the Spurs the other night Chief? Watch the playoff series against the Spurs/Nuggets and you'll see Pop use that same play about 20 times a game. Camby will not challenge an outside shot on a pick and roll play. He'll ALWAYS go for the player moving toward the rim)

It will make the Clippers a better offensive team, but my God are they going to suck on defense.

3) The Knicks won't have a high draft pick in 2010. That's actually Utah's pick. So all Nuggets/Blazer/TWolve/Thunder fans should be paraying NY is respectable in 2010 or Utah is going to get another high draft pick. Ugh.