Re: Knight

["JLyell" <jlyell@concentric.net>]

>Hey all, I'm new to the list.
>
>>Dean Garret had a much better season than Knight, is a more complete NBA
>>center, and could have been signed for 3 million a year.
>>
>>Adam
>
>Dean Garrett is also already 30 years old and isn't going to get much
>better if any.  In two years it's possible Knight will be a better player
>and will still be improving his game.  Garrett will be in decline by then.
>Remember Knight was just a rookie unlike Conlon & Garrett.
>
>Besides at the rate revenues and the cap are increasing, $3 million per
>annum is going to seem like peanuts soon if not already.  Knight's deal is
>at worst still far better than the McIllvaine deal and at the very least as
>economical as the Ostertag and Reeves deals longterm.  I predict that in 3
>years fans will be bemoaning Knight's out-clause rather than the remaining
>years on his contract.  Just MHO.
>
>
>Tim


I have got to agree with the Tim on this one.  Garrett is a bit more
experienced but Knight at $3M will be a steal.  These days if you are 7'0 ,
can dribble, and block a couple of shots you're worth $3-$5M, look at
Mcilvaine.  If you can shoot that is worth even more. The out clause could
hurt though at re-negotiaton  time.





>
>"My sister used to date a tiger...we didn't care he was a cool guy."
>
>- Lenny the Lion on SNL
>
>
>