Interesting situation emerging with Eddy Curry

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Finally someone who sees what I have been preaching about for years now. If anyone on this team is tradable it is Chills. He is a luxury on great teams but a trade piece on mediocre ones. We have an advantage because we have a number of short term contracts we can move. Chills is up after this year, Zaza is up after next year. We can move Shelden without any backlash from the fanbase whatsoever, and the knick could sell him to NY as a young big with a comparitively small contract.

While Curry is an ill fitting piece in NYC, he'd be a key peace in Atl. In my lineup he'd start. He may be a black hole, but he is by far better in the post than any of our current players. He'd give us a legitimate 5. We could use him in multiple lineup sets. My fav would be a "Big" linuep of

JJ, Law, Smoove, Horford, Curry

I think that Curry would be a better defender and rebounder under Woody's system. He won't be an allstar, but I'd feel much better about him defending the Shaq's and Howards of the world, than either Horford or Zaza.

IMO he gives us the maximum amount of talent for giving up the least amount of talent.

I challenge anyone on H.S. to name another player with Curry's talent who would be available for a Childress/Shelden type trade.

---

And the one thing about Curry, is that he forces the other big to guard him in the post. When that happens, teams have to either gameplan to stop him, or foul him. He's too good of a scorer to let him do what he wants.

I looked on the knicks board the other day, and they're all for Randolph starting at center. You'd think Curry was Shelden Williams, let them tell it. Curry did have a great game yesterday, but I hope he continues to struggle a bit. I want to see if Isaiah would seriously be willing to trade him.

Karl Malone always complained about having a "dominant center" to play alongside him. Curry isn't "dominant", but Karl maybe wins 2 titles with a center with the scoring ability of Curry.

[Johnnybravo4]

The irony is that the Bulls would probably be a better team with Curry.

What may be the roadblock is what is the relationship between Curry and BK after our first courtship of Curry in 05?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

It's funny though. People didn't want to bring in Iverson, or Artest, or Francis ( before he went to NY ), or Randolph, and is split on Gasol . . . but they're all for bringing in Nene, Ridnour, Calderon, Biendrins or Haywood. It's a "low-cost potential" over "high-priced actual skill" mindset.

---

Based on what we have seen from them so far, they were dead on about Francis, Artest and Randolph. Iverson has been better than ever in Denver, but one of the two biggest concerns with him (age) wasn't this year but two years or so down the line when our players are starting into their primes so that will be a wait and see. Gasol is sucking this year but clearly has had the most support of these guys.

I just can't believe you are bashing people for not wanting Francis!!!! That is like bashing people for thinking Michael Olowkandi shouldn't have been a #1 pick.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Please. Bringing in Curry to come off the bench is an AWFUL move for a franchise with limited resources. Don't go trying to justify this awful trade by insulting the people on this board.

---

So adding a guy who averaged 19.5 ppg and shot 57% from the field last season at center, would be an awful move? I mean, you could start him, but that means either Horford, Smoove, or Marvin goes to the bench. I'd rather bring him off the bench, have him concentrate on just being a scorer, and let Horford and Smoove handle the boards.

Curry is definitely a flawed player. He's a bad rebounder for his size, and a God awful shot blocker. But he's one of the top 10 scoring post players in the league. The 650 something FTs he shot, was #5 in the league last year. His total shot % was 60%.

This guy is flawed, but definitely not a scrub. He's like a highly efficient scoring version of Zaza. When Zaza is scoring, his horrible defense is much less of an issue. If he shot over 50% FG, Zaza would definitely start over Horford, despite most of wishes.

Centers who put up scoring nunbers like Curry does, are usually making max money, not 10 mill a year. Isaiah won't trade Curry, unless he's absolutely desperate, and he may be getting close to that. He's unhappy with just about everybody outside of Zachary these days.

Ish, it isn't an impossibility that both Chill and Shelden could start in NY. Shell could be their Kurt Thomas.

[Johnnybravo4]

For the record I'd still rather have Francis running point than anyone currently playing point for us.

As far as Artest, he's still a better defender than anyone on our team besides smoove, and would still be a better 2nd option.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Based on what we have seen from them so far, they were dead on about Francis, Artest and Randolph. Iverson has been better than ever in Denver, but one of the two biggest concerns with him (age) wasn't this year but two years or so down the line when our players are starting into their primes so that will be a wait and see. Gasol is sucking this year but clearly has had the most support of these guys.

I just can't believe you are bashing people for not wanting Francis!!!! That is like bashing people for thinking Michael Olowkandi shouldn't have been a #1 pick.

---

Trading for Zack means that Horford and maybe Smoove or Law probably isn't here. He'd definitely be a great 2nd option scorer for us, but that means we'd have to go extremely small on the frontline. So I know why we didn't do that. Zack isn't the reason why NY still can't win though.

Nah, I'm not bashing people for not wanting Steve. It's just interesting that the board almost fiends for guys like Ridnour and Dalembert, when they've done nothing in this league. Like those guys could really be impact players for us. Both of those guys are more flawed and less skilled. They're just cheaper.

LOL . . . Franchise wasn't that bad, at the time he was available. Didn't Stevie hang like 35 points on us in a game last season? I think he's in that mode in which his mind still thinks that he's the man, but his body and skills can't let him be the man on a nightlly basis. That's why is in limbo as a player right now. On the Hawks though, he'd be starting at PG and we might be a better squad.

Artest or Marvin at SF? Remember, at the time in which he was available, it was all about possibly trading Harrington for him. Adding Artest basically takes up the room that we gave Speedy and in picking up AJ's contract. And the acquistion of Artest did initally paid off for the Kings, seeing that they made a run to the playoffs that year I believe. I think Artest is in the last year of his deal, so he'd come off the books this year anyway.

Iverson is a superstar player. People who were against not bringing him here, weren't looking at the total situaton. He and JJ instantly becomes the best backcourt in the league. And I don't believe that he's still not going to be playing at an all-star level 2 years from now. Even when AI loses a half of a step, he's still going to be one of the fastest players in the league. Like Curry, what he gives up defensively, he makes you pay on the offensive end.

My point is that teams usually get significantly better, when they trade for veteran highly skilled talent.

[coachx]

I'm with ya Northcyde. Curry would give us 25-29 good minutes of low post scoring a night. Smith's help defense would be a huge asset to Curry. When we need to run, Curry comes out the game but there are alwayse times when the half court offense gets stagnant, jumpers don't fall, and the absence of a low post scoring threat is felt.

I started a post on the same topic on 11/30 in the trade forum with zero support too.

I would trade for Curry if 2 things occured:

1. The Knicks take ZaZa / Sheldon / Lue. The salaries work according to RealGm.

2. Ownership makes the commitment to resign our current players even if that means paying a little luxury tax.

Of course I doubt the Knicks take that trade but Curry is not worth any more then that to me.

[Traceman]

think he would be a nice addition to this team. I'd trade a Chillz/Zaza (or Shelden)/filler package for him in a heartbeat. His presence would make the game so much easier for JJ and Marvin on offense, particularly if he could learn how to pass out of the low post.

It would not matter to me whether Curry started, Horford started or Marvin started because all 3 would still play 30 + mpg.

I'll bet we could bring in Ruben Patterson to fill Chillz' role off the bench for little to nothing. If he doesn't work out, so what?

You are right on about Curry's salary. It is not likely to be more than what it would take to pay Chillz next year plus Zaza's (or Shelden's) salary.

I like Chillz and I certainly am not looking to trade him because I think he brings a lot to the team both on and off the court. That said, I would deal him for a true low post scorer - even one who doesn't rebound or defend like he should.

[Johnnybravo4]

It nakes too much sense for us to do it.

[AHF]

I will say this for Curry, he would fit Woodson's preference for a grind-it-out half-court offense much better than much of our current personnel. Since Woodson shows now signs of wanting to maximize our athletes on offense (although he clearly does on defense), an addition like Curry would be a big boost to our offensive game.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

I will say this for Curry, he would fit Woodson's preference for a grind-it-out half-court offense much better than much of our current personnel. Since Woodson shows now signs of wanting to maximize our athletes on offense (although he clearly does on defense), an addition like Curry would be a big boost to our offensive game.

---

The Hawks have had 3 games recently (minny, Memphis, Cats) where they have scored more than 20 pts on the fast break.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

It nakes too much sense for us to do it.

---

You really should be a Knicks fan. You love no D expensive chuckers and they have a bunch of them.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I will say this for Curry, he would fit Woodson's preference for a grind-it-out half-court offense much better than much of our current personnel. Since Woodson shows now signs of wanting to maximize our athletes on offense (although he clearly does on defense), an addition like Curry would be a big boost to our offensive game.

---

The Hawks have had 3 games recently (minny, Memphis, Cats) where they have scored more than 20 pts on the fast break.

---

I'll just say I need to see a lot more than 3 games when we are watching this team in its fourth year under Mike woodson before I can buy into that leopard changing his spots.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I will say this for Curry, he would fit Woodson's preference for a grind-it-out half-court offense much better than much of our current personnel. Since Woodson shows now signs of wanting to maximize our athletes on offense (although he clearly does on defense), an addition like Curry would be a big boost to our offensive game.

---

The Hawks have had 3 games recently (minny, Memphis, Cats) where they have scored more than 20 pts on the fast break.

---

I'll just say I need to see a lot more than 3 games when we are watching this team in its fourth year under Mike woodson before I can buy into that leopard changing his spots.

---

True but thinking about that last couple of seasons it is a definite step in the right direction.

Remember that injuries make it much tougher to run.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I will say this for Curry, he would fit Woodson's preference for a grind-it-out half-court offense much better than much of our current personnel. Since Woodson shows now signs of wanting to maximize our athletes on offense (although he clearly does on defense), an addition like Curry would be a big boost to our offensive game.

---

The Hawks have had 3 games recently (minny, Memphis, Cats) where they have scored more than 20 pts on the fast break.

---

I'll just say I need to see a lot more than 3 games when we are watching this team in its fourth year under Mike woodson before I can buy into that leopard changing his spots.

---

True but thinking about that last couple of seasons it is a definite step in the right direction.

Remember that injuries make it much tougher to run.

---

I am happy to see it and have seen more of it this year. We have reasonable depth this year with a bench of Shelden, Childress, Zaza, Salim, Solomon, Lo Wright, and our bevy of point guards. No doubt that it is harder without a few of them but we have enough players to lose a few guys and still be able to run a very effetive 8 man rotation (which should be enough).