Would you give up Rudy to get David Lee?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Rastapopoulos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
42,494
Likes
26,894
Points
113
Supposedly, that's what it would take:

we're told that Donnie Walsh, despite wanting to keep Lee in the fold, is taking serious consideration into any reasonable S&T for Lee -- then Lee and his agent, Mark Bartelstein, are prepared to negotiate a one-year deal to remain in New York for the 2009-10 season. He will then become an unrestricted free agent in next summer.

Again, we can only speculate about the potential sign-and-trades at this point. You could guess that the Portland Trail Blazers may be one of the interested parties.

The Blazers were very close to tendering an offer sheet to Lee after the Jazz matched their offer for Paul Millsap. In fact, Knicks insiders tell me they were bracing for it, but Blazers GM Kevin Pritchard felt the Knicks were sure to match, so he went with Andre Miller instead.

The Knicks have made it pretty clear to Portland that any discussion involving Lee would have to start with Rudy Fernandez ($1.1M with team opt in 2010). So far, the Blazers have been reluctant to include Fernandez and, after signing Miller, are more likely to want to involve Steve Blake ($4.9M) and Travis Outlaw ($4M). This works for Lee because it's around the type of salary range he's looking for ($9M) and it works for the Knicks' 2010 plan because both contracts are expiring deals. Plus, while Outlaw gives scoring punch on the wing, Blake would give some needed depth in the backcourt.

But, from what I understand, so far the Knicks are not interested if Fernandez is not in the deal. Lee is a valuable asset and the Knicks aren't interested in just giving him away for a pair of expiring deals.

I wouldn't. I've never been able to understand the fascination with Lee. I wouldn't trade Joel for him, because Joel can rebound, block shots AND defend. Lee can just rebound and score a little, as far as I can see. He's sort of a taller Cedric Ceballos.
 
No. I think for our team, Rudy is more valuable than David Lee is.
 
I think I would. Rudy is going to be stuck behind Roy forever. Rudy cant play the point and can't play SF. I think Rudy is going to be unhappy and return to Spain after next year. So even though I like Rudy, his IQ is off the charts, I think I would do it as long as Lee knows he isn't playing 40 mpg. We have too much talent on this team, a consolidation trade is needed sometime.
 
I wouldn't make the trade.

You be bringing in a guy who will be in the same position as Rudy, only make 8 to 10 times as much money. Not worth it, IMHO.
 
me said:
I think I wouldn't. Lee is going to be stuck behind LaMarcus forever. Lee cant play the SF and can't play C. I think Lee would be unhappy and end up demanding a trade after next year. So even though I like Lee, his effort is off the charts, I think I wouldn't do it, because we know Lee wants to play 30-35 mpg. We have too much talent on this team, a consolidation trade is needed sometime, but not this one.

I agree.
 
I like David Lee and don't love Rudy as much as some, but for this team that wouldn't make sense. Adding Lee for "free" (using cap space) I was in favor of, irrespective of the fit with the roster. I'd be willing to do Outlaw and Blake for Lee, too... but not Rudy.

There are, as Denny said, BYC issues at this point.

Ed O.
 
There is also the issue that Portland and Lee talked this summer and agreed they wouldn't be the best fit. Congrats on Walsh and Newsday trying to create some interest in Lee though.
 
I always find it interesting when another team "demands" one of your players. In this case, it raises my opinion of Fernandez, and makes me think we ought to keep him. After all, he is the one player on our team that the Knicks really want! :)
 
There is also the issue that Portland and Lee talked this summer and agreed they wouldn't be the best fit. Congrats on Walsh and Newsday trying to create some interest in Lee though.

That's what I was thinking. If Ptd really wanted Lee, they would have gone after him via free agency. Why would NY matching stop the Blazers from making an offer? On top of that, NY is trying to maintain flexibility for the Lebron sweepstakes . . . so mathcing is not a given.


Instead, Ptd sat down with Lee and after talks both sides decided Ptd wasn't the fit for Lee .(I'm guessing with Lee's popularity and numerous endorsements he didn't want to play back up minutes waiting for his chance for big minutes).

Unless Lee is willing to take a back seat and wait for his chance(unlikely) . . . Ptd isn't a good fit.
 
I really value D from the frontcourt, and Lee has never impressed me on that end.

Rudy is a solid all around offensive guard and probably the Blazers best outside threat.

no thanks

STOMP
 
Why you would consider trading Rudy: he won't be happy unless he gets his minutes.

Why you don't trade for Lee: same reason.
 
I wouldnt trade Rudy, but I would do the Blake/Outlaw for Lee that is talked about in the article.
 
Also, I'd include the 2010 pick with Outlaw/Blake.

We are stacked with young talent/prospects at every position.

PG: Bayless/Koponen
SG: Rudy
SF: Batum/Claver/Webster
PF: Aldridge/Lee/Cunningham
C: Oden/Freeland/Pendergraph
 
Lee is pretty expendable so it won't bother me if we keep him or not. But I wouldn't be willing to trade Lee for Outlaw/Blake as he has way more value than that. For one, we're pretty good at SF with Chandler and Gallo. At PG, I'd rather re-sign Nate or give Toney Douglas minutes instead of having Blake.

Here are probably the only scenarios we'll trade Lee to Portland under:
-You give us Bayless without us taking on salary past 2010
-You give us Fernandez without us taking on salary past 2010
-You take Curry and/or Jeffries off our hands
-You give us a first rounder without us taking on salary

In short, Lee probably isn't going to Portland -at least not via sign-and-trade.
 
I'm concerned about both Lee and Rudy's level of future contentment with the Blazers.

Rudy's unhappiness this summer with the potential Turkaglu signing, to me, is a red flag. While initial reports seemed to be a bit blown out of proportion, I believe he did have some direct quotes which suggested some unhappiness. This makes me worried he's not as much of a team guy as we would like. Add this to the lack of minutes for a player of his talent, and I worry we aren't going to be able to re-sign him when the time comes.

Lee's situation isn't much different. I guess if it is a S&T, we could have him locked up longer, but if a guy isn't happy, it's not a great idea to hold him to his contract.

Long story short, I don't know that Rudy is going to be a Blazer long-term. I could see the relationship turning sour. So, as much as I love Rudy, I think that it makes sense to consider trade offers. I just don't think Lee is an offer that makes enough sense.
 
I'm concerned about both Lee and Rudy's level of future contentment with the Blazers.

Rudy's unhappiness this summer with the potential Turkaglu signing, to me, is a red flag. While initial reports seemed to be a bit blown out of proportion, I believe he did have some direct quotes which suggested some unhappiness. This makes me worried he's not as much of a team guy as we would like. Add this to the lack of minutes for a player of his talent, and I worry we aren't going to be able to re-sign him when the time comes.

Lee's situation isn't much different. I guess if it is a S&T, we could have him locked up longer, but if a guy isn't happy, it's not a great idea to hold him to his contract.

Long story short, I don't know that Rudy is going to be a Blazer long-term. I could see the relationship turning sour. So, as much as I love Rudy, I think that it makes sense to consider trade offers. I just don't think Lee is an offer that makes enough sense.
Lee doesn't have any loyalty issues. He said his first priority is staying with the Knicks. The only issue with that is our 2010 plan and re-signing Lee would interfere with that. Lee understandably wants to get paid so he is also pursuing other options S&T, etc.
 
Lee doesn't have any loyalty issues. He said his first priority is staying with the Knicks. The only issue with that is our 2010 plan and re-signing Lee would interfere with that. Lee understandably wants to get paid so he is also pursuing other options S&T, etc.

I don't doubt that he hasn't had loyalty issues while with the Knicks. I am worried about Lee not being happy in Portland, with the limited minutes he would be likely to receive.
 
-You give us Bayless without us taking on salary past 2010
-You give us a first rounder without us taking on salary

I'm down with these options. Lee could give us solid contributions towards a title this season. There could be some mutual benefit for both teams.

I do like the upside Bayless has but he's a wildcard, he might be good or he might suck; whereas we know Lee is very solid. Bayless would get opportunities in NY, whereas he'll be the 3rd PG here in Portland. Outlaw could be a valuable contributor under D'Antoni but if he doesn't fit they can let him walk.

I don't see us trading Blake, he is worth more to our team than anyone else.

I don't like the idea of giving up Rudy just to give a big contract to David Lee.
 
I can't wait for the Knicks crack dream to die, like every other "Oh, so and so is going to sign with the Knicks" crack dream they have every time a big name becomes a free agent.
 
I think Bayless and Outlaw could both be solid guys over there, especially playing for Dantoni. I just really don't think Lee makes any sense here whatsoever, he can't play 3, isn't very versatile, gets his stats at an inflated pace on a team with no bigs. Here he'd be playing slower and with a lot of bigs, c'mon.

What if it were some type of three way deal? Lee has value, maybe

Outlaw/Bayless to NY
Lee/Blake to MEM (Blake played very well with AI previously)
Gasol/Conley to POR

Gasol could play spot minutes at 4 (we'd be really big but that's fine) and he'd be insurance incase Joel left after next year. Conley makes a lot of sense for us long-term as a good young guy who's friends with GO and can learn from Miller too. And Memphis just did draft another C who can't play well long-term with Gasol.

Miller/Conley
Roy/Fernandez
Webster/Batum
Aldridge/Gasol
Oden/Pryzbilla

/\ could be in championship contention next year. Maybe a little slow for a team, but almost everyone can pass really well and has high court IQ.
 
Supposedly, that's what it would take:



I wouldn't. I've never been able to understand the fascination with Lee. I wouldn't trade Joel for him, because Joel can rebound, block shots AND defend. Lee can just rebound and score a little, as far as I can see. He's sort of a taller Cedric Ceballos.

I wouldn't and I don't think he'd be happy coming off the bench anyway.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top