Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Bobcats and Knicks trade rumor ( VERY INTERESTING)


BOBCATS_BALL!

Recommended Posts

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/20/report-knicks-trying-to-trade-up-to-get-jimmer-fredette/

Jimmer Fredette and how he fits in the NBA divides scouts and fans, but there is one thing almost all agree on — he’s a better fit in a wide-open offensive system where he would have more of a green light.

For example, Mike D’Antoni’s system with the New York Knicks.

Which explains why ESPN’s Chad Ford is reporting (behind ESPN’s pay wall) the Knicks are trying to move up in the draft to see if they can get Jimmer.

Sources say that the Charlotte Bobcats (9), Milwaukee Bucks (10) and Golden State Warriors (11) are also open to moving their picks. In this case the interest is all pretty specific. The Knicks, and a handful of other teams, are trying to get ahead of the Jazz. The target? BYU’s Jimmer Fredette.

Interesting, but the Knicks are not exactly loaded with trade assets (those all went to Denver to get Carmelo Anthony, thank you very much James Dolan). Can Landry Fields and the No.17 pick move you up seven spots or so?

Is that worth it to get Jimmer? There is no way Jimmer falls to 17. There are a lot of teams willing to move picks in this draft but not a lot of teams willing to give up quality assets to move up. At least not yet.

Now I know this is just a rumor and unlikey to happen but if we could do a trade like that for the 9th, I would be so happy. Look at what this draft could become with a trade like that.

9. Landry Fields

17. Marshon Brooks

19. Jordan Hamilton

39. Keith Benson

I honestly cant imagine a better scenario but I realize this probably has little chance of happening.

I might even do 9 and 19 for Fields and 17 ( Knicks might have to throw something else in too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more likely to happen then one would initially think. Silas and the Cats like this drafts depth rather then individual talents.... (reason why they turned down the move up 2 - 1 swap, but reverse that and give the bobcats a player and let them keep 2 first round picks.... I don't think they turn that down.

NY would do it because he doesn't really fit the team at this point and it would allow them to get a player that should fit into NY's system perfectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jizzed in my pants

I know, think about how much more talented this team will be if we have Fields at SF and then add two more first round talents. And in this draft the guy you get at 9 and the guy you get at 17 arent too different.

I honestly dont think you cant get a guy as good as Fields at 9 plus we get a first rounder.

I would go wild if this did happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would be very happy but I highly doubt the Knicks would risk that, they don't really need Fredette and Fields spot up shooting helps out a lot on their squad. They would much rather get a distributing pg who can get the ball to Amare and Melo, as well as run in D'Antoni's offense much like Nash did

In my opinion the Knicks need to get rid of D'Antoni and pull out all stops for Chris Paul. Trading away a piece like Landry Fields for a huge risk like Fredette just doesn't make much sense to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...