Comments

Quick fix: the Knicks would actually be able to add NINE minimum contract players after their first six guys are in place.

Joe Treutlein           122

And another note, this is also assuming the Knicks don't pick up Joey Dorsey's team option next season, though doing so would only set them back 456,120 in cap space (946,300 - 490,180, his salary - the cap hold he'd replace), making it certainly feasible to keep him and still sign two max players, if they think he's a good enough upgrade on the minimum contract player that would replace him.

Danisrob           123

Wouldnt Curry's expiring contract be worth more as a trade chip during the season?

Joe Treutlein           124

It possibly could have value, but it may be necessary for the Knicks to buy him out in order to have enough space to sign two max players. At 53million, they should just be able to avoid buying him out, but if it drops lower, they may have no choice.

37 Years           125

Wouldn't they be smarter to keep Curry, to trade him when he's an expiring? For example, if he has just a year or less to go at $11.3M, they could trade him to a team with a vet at, say, $11.3M for another 4 years, saving that team about $35M. Seems like better bang for the buck.

Joe Treutlein           126

That would be a smart thing to do if they still have enough room to sign two max contract players without buying him out. That is uncertain right now.

37 Years           127

Wouldn't they be smarter to keep Curry, to trade him when he's an expiring? For example, if he has just a year or less to go at $11.3M, they could trade him to a team with a vet at, say, $11.3M for another 4 years, saving that team about $35M. Seems like better bang for the buck.

37 Years           128

Sorry for the double-post. Don't know how that happened. Seems like, with a little creativity, a cap benefit of $900k should be attainable in other ways, doesn't it?

Bobbo           129

It's insane. This is a bet-your-franchise move. Imagine if it goes south and the reality is that it will. What is the lure other than the "storied-franchise-that-hasn't-won-anything-since-1973" and the "Mecca of basketball"? The prospect of playing with a bunch of vet minimum players and three other guys ages 21 through 24? One first round pick in three years and two second round picks? Who's their center? Who's their point guard? None of the top free agents is either. Vet minimum guys? Oh boy, that's alluring. The most likely outcome is that if this is what they are faced with, the top tier free agents stay at home and the Knicks resign David Lee. They dumped Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford for this? Factor in that MSG has just been spun off by Cablevision and must stand on its own two feet...aka the Rangers and Knicks. Not a good business move.

37 Years           130

Sorry for the double-post. Don't know how that happened. Seems like, with a little creativity, a cap benefit of $900k should be attainable in other ways, doesn't it?

37 Years           131

Bobbo, this franchise has been a laughingstock for 10 years. So how big of a risk is it? Don't you think 2 superstars can win a championship with Gallo, Chandler, Douglass and, hopefully, an aging vet or two coming over for the minimum to have a chance to win a championship? You're right, we'd still need some bulk. Maybe Ben Wallace or Shaq? Seems worth the risk for me. I've been buying expensive season tix for 25 years now and I'm ready for a high-risk, high-reward strategy.

gregori           132

the cap hold on lee is 10.5 mil (150%) of his present salary. so deducting 10.5 mil from the 32.2mil noted above would leave 21.7mil for free agents and then knicks can sign lee with bird rights over the cap.

Alex           133

Why does everyone assume that stars coming to NY will only sign for the max available? I think that any smart ballplayer (and at least Wade and James are extremely smart) would see the value of taking a little less in compensation in order to be the person who "saves" basketball in the mecca of basketball. If they actually can lift the team into the stratosphere, the endorsement contracts gained in the marketing capital of the world will far outweigh the money they might give up in compensation. If I were James and Wade (or James and Bosh), I would team up and agree to take 3-5 million less each to get a third "star" in knowing that the money I give up will quickly be made back and more in endorsement bling. Of course, this is dreaming, but how about James, Gay and Wade and then Chris Paul when the Curry contract expires in 2011...? Heh.

Tom Haberstroh           134

The union would never allow LeBron or any other star to voluntarily sign for half their worth.

gregori           135

max stars are already taking significantly less when they sign with other than their previous team.

fuhry           139

Another option with the cap space would be to get one max player and re-sign David Lee. You may even be able to fit another lower priced signing in there, assuming you sign Lee for 10-11 million.

Jimmy           141

JOE TREUTLIN- Isn't the 12 player contract requirement ONLY applicable for the regular season. Specify when a team must have 12 players under contract. Doesn't the NBA draft play a part in all of this? The Knicks have 2 second rd picks this season. Aren't these player salaries not a part of the cap? I think it's a little more complex than the way you put it.

evan           142

following up on furhy, then you could use curry's expiring to trade for another player or go after another big fish in the summer of '11. carmelo?