More Trade Speculation

[Michael Gooen <callmebogie@yahoo.com>]

Dan Forant wrote:
 
<<Spurs by 10, over-under 190. Latest bets 1 hour before game time. I have
the Spurs and under.>>

I am expressly NOT taking this bet against EvilDan (I don't bet on or
against my team), but I will say that I look forward to a nice Cs win and
hearing from GoodDan about how great they looked and how optimistic he is
for the future.
 

Derek Showerman created the following controversy:

<<it looks as if the Knicks might be moving towards a rebuilding faze>>

Ordinarily wouldn't be so pedantic as to comment on the typo, but ya gotta
love this one -- the Knicks are TOTALLY fazed.

<<Do you think the Knicks would make this move: 					
<<New York trades: Marcus Camby>><<Mark Jackson>><<Clarence Weatherspoon>>
<<Boston trades: Vitaly Potapenko>><<Joe Johnson>><<Joseph Forte>><<Kenny
Anderson>>		

If the Cs could be guaranteed a healthy, consistent Camby, I would do this
deal (and the Knicks probably wouldn't make it).  However, the man has
earned his nicknames ("Cotton" Camby and Marcus "Can't be").  He is
woefully inconsistent and frightfully injury-prone.  Jackson at this point
in his career and Weatherspoon are negatives, pure cap-killers.  

Wouldn't do this deal even if the Knicks threw in Nick Weatherspoon (props
to Cecil for the historical reference), whom they will likely sign as part
of their desperate "70s flashback/recapture the magic" theme.  How lame
was that, anyway?  I guess they forgot (a) that the Cs were no slouches
during the height of the 70s, either and (b) during the Gloria Gaynor era,
the Knicks were awful.  Nice to know that if the Cs tried to do that,
they'd at least have a broad historical spectrum from which to choose.

In my view, only other intriguing guy on the market besides Wallace and
Davis is Lamar Odom, but what would the Cs have to give up to get him? 
Any thoughts on Johnson, Forte and Palacio (plus maybe a pick) for Odom
and McInnis?  Advantage is that it nets a budding superstar and a definite
upgrade at the point while giving up guys with nice talent but less
upside.  Disadvantage is that it presents a real chemistry (in both the
team-relationship and controlled substance sense) risk, not to mention a
third max or near-max contract.
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/