Knicks Fix

[m33p0]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...Knicks-080118b

i doubt isiah would do any of these. they make too much sense.

Fixing the Knicks, Part II: Four steps to success

The Isiah Thomas era in New York has been dying a slow death for the past two seasons. A three-game win streak not withstanding, owner James Dolan has had all the ammunition he needs to kick Isiah to the curb for more than a year now. (Here's a transaction-by-transaction case for why the Knicks' president of basketball operations needs to go.)

At this point, it seems to be a matter of "when", not "if", Isiah will get fired.

Isiah's deal for Zach Randolph has backfired in New York.

And at some juncture, whether Isiah loses his job now or at the end of the season, someone is going to have to come in, sift through the rubble and try to salvage a basketball team out of the Knicks.

Dubbed "Mission Impossible" by several prominent GMs, the once-coveted Knicks job is now considered a quagmire of salary-cap mingled with combustible chemistry.

Big name executives with stellar reputations -- like Jerry West, Jerry and Bryan Colangelo and Donnie Walsh -- have been mentioned as possible candidates for the job. But this mission, should any executive choose to accept it, would be the most challenging of their career.

For more than a year I've been talking with GMs about what they would do to fix the Knicks. The answer, invariably, has been a chuckle followed with a rejoinder: What would you do?

It's easy to criticize Isiah Thomas for the moves he has made. Suggesting a course correction is more difficult … but I'm up for the challenge.

The Knicks' situation is salvageable. Bring in the right people at the top, change the culture, hire a great head coach, manage the cap carefully, develop the young guys and the Knicks might actually look like a basketball team in a few years.

I think the model to follow is the Blazers. Four years ago they were the "Jail Blazers" -- a team filled with talented players, zero chemistry and plenty of problems. Now? They are the hottest team in basketball, with a young core fans can stand behind.

Mr. Dolan, I hope you're taking notes.


Step One: Buy out Stephon Marbury

When Isiah acquired Marbury three years ago, just about everyone thought it was a slam dunk of a deal. The Knicks gave up a few expiring contracts and draft picks and in turn landed a young point guard who could re-energize the Garden.

Only Marbury hasn't been nearly as good as Isiah (or Stephon, for that matter) thought he'd be, and the Knicks haven't been able to put together a winning season in New York.

Marbury has one more year and nearly $20 million left on his contract after this season. The Knicks have tried to trade him or the past 2½ years, but no one's biting. He hasn't had a good season in several years, he's been at odds with his past two coaches and he's been missing in action since his father died.

At this point, no one is trading for him. So the Knicks should fire him. Yes, it would cost them a fortune, but it would be worth every penny.

Some will argue that he'll be a valuable trading chip next summer because of his expiring contract. But using expiring contracts to collect talent hasn't worked out well for the Knicks. With this strategy, they have gotten back overpaid, third-tier type players in return; generally teams that want cap room won't give up great talent to get it.

Although Marbury could bring the Knicks something in return, it most likely won't be as valuable as getting back some cap flexibility down the road.

And whether Marbury goes on to resurrect his career elsewhere is not an issue. It's not happening in New York. The quicker the Knicks get him out, the quicker the team can begin to move away from the Isiah era. Making a bold move like dumping him sends a message to the team's next coach: The front office is serious about creating a different atmosphere in New York.


Step Two: Trade Eddy Curry or Zach Randolph

If the Marbury deal was the one that started the Knicks' descent into , it was the Curry trade that sealed the door. The Knicks gave up two lottery picks and paid a boatload of cash for Curry, a talented low-post scorer who does little else on the court. And, so far, he's been unable to coexist with Randolph.

As disappointing as Eddy Curry has been, he might have trade value.

Although it may be Randolph who is begging for a trade, I think Curry may be easier to pawn off. Randolph is the more talented of the two, but he also has more off-the-court baggage. Curry's deal is also for far less money, and the fact that he's a center may make him attractive to a team with a huge hole in the middle.

Although it may seem crazy to give away a guy the Knicks spent so much money on, cost is irrelevant at this point. He's a bad fit and the Knicks need flexibility and chemistry.

What type of deal might make sense for the Knicks?

First I'd hit up the Hawks, who are making a push for the playoffs. Although Al Horford has been great for them in the middle, he's much more suited for the power forward position. A deal that sends Zaza Pachulia and Tyronn Lue to the Knicks for Curry (or if the Hawks won't part with Pachulia, then Lorenzen Wright) would give the Knicks cap relief.

Another team that might be willing to take Curry is the Magic. They have Dwight Howard dominating in the middle, but he and Curry could play together in the front court. Two expiring contracts (take your pick of Carlos Arroyo, Keyon Dooling, Keith Bogans and Pat Garrity) along with J.J. Re might be enough for the Knicks.

They may also try to entice the Wizards with a deal of Curry and Malik Rose for Antawn Jamison, whose contract comes off the books at the end of the season.

If the Knicks can't trade Curry, they can keep trying to find a home for Randolph. There's been talk in the media about Randolph being sent to the Bucks. However, if you look at the long-term salary cap implications of the rumored deal, it doesn't make sense for the Knicks -- even if Charlie Villanueva is in the deal.

The Lakers could also put together a deal that included Kwame Brown's expiring contract and one or two of their young players like Jordan Farmar, Javaris Crittenton and/or Trevor Ariza.

Or the Knicks could try to get Jamison for Randolph if the Wizards won't bite on Curry.

They also could try a swap with the Cavs to get Drew Gooden and expiring contracts in return.

Still, getting rid of Curry or Randolph is only half the battle. For the Knicks to have real cap flexibility in the next few years, they need to find a way to get one more guy off their roster. Whether that's Jared Jeffries, Jamal Crawford or whoever's left between Curry and Randolph, they'll have to find a way to get a player whose contract expires in the summer of 2010.


Step Three: Start to dig the Knicks out of salary-cap

The Knicks' payroll issues are bleak. The team has committed to a whopping $95.2 million in payroll this season. Add in the roughly $27 million they'll owe the league in luxury=tax penalties and it gets even uglier.

Things don't get much better next season -- they only drop one contract, Fred Jones', from the books. As it stands now, the Knicks' payroll goes down to $89.8 million in 2008-09.

The watershed year is the summer of 2009. Marbury, Rose and Mardy Collins all come off the books and the Knicks' payroll plummets to $62 million. That's not enough to sign free agents, but for the first time in a long time the Knicks will have breathing room from the luxury tax.

Of course, had they not pulled the trigger on the Randolph deal this past summer, they could've been $10-$15 million under the cap in 2009.

If the Knicks are patient for one more year after that, Quentin Richardson and Jerome James can come off the books, too. However, by then they'll have to decide how much to pay David Lee and Nate Robinson.

So, in the summer of 2010 -- the same summer that LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh become unrestricted free agents -- the Knicks could conceivably have cap room, especially if they move Curry or Randolph for cap space down the road.

Patience is a virtue here. If Isiah had bit the bullet and whittled away the Knicks' salary cap when he got to New York, he would have had serious cap room this past summer.

Instead, the Knicks are in worse shape than when he arrived. The next guy can't make the same mistake.

Cap room doesn't win championships, but it gives teams the flexibility to make things happen. Right now the Knicks have zero flexibility, essentially neutralizing anything intelligent that a GM can do.

If the Knicks can find a way to get rid of some combination of Curry or Randolph plus either Jeffries or Crawford for a contract that expires after the 2009-10 season, they could be major players on the free-agent market in 2010.


Step Four: Start collecting lottery balls

With the exception of Lee and Robinson, the Knicks have done a poor job of cultivating their young talent. That has to change.

If the Knicks start rebuilding, it should produce high lottery picks the next few years. If they can get a high pick this season and use it to draft a franchise player like Memphis' Derrick Rose, the Knicks suddenly would have some talent to build around.

Two draft picks combined with Lee and Robinson could form a nice core. And it needs to happen now -- Utah owns the Knicks' 2010 pick, which is unprotected. So they need to score big in the next two drafts.


Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.

[Findog]

Why do the Knicks have to get under the cap? They can afford to pay the luxury tax. Fiscal discipline isn't necessary for them to return to contention.

The problem isn't the bad contracts, it's that those contracts are attached to underachieving performances. And the roster that they've assembled is full of selfish guys that don't buy into the team concept and don't play defense, David Lee and Renaldo excepted of course. They can win a le with a $100 million payroll. I don't understand why he goes on and on about how New York has to get under the cap. They operate in a different economic reality than most teams. If anything, assuming Dolan wasn't the owner, being GM of the Knicks would actually be an easy job, because you wouldn't have to worry about paying the luxury tax in assembling a roster.

[exstatic]

Why do the Knicks have to get under the cap? They can afford to pay the luxury tax. Fiscal discipline isn't necessary for them to return to contention.

The problem isn't the bad contracts, it's that those contracts are attached to underachieving performances. And the roster that they've assembled is full of selfish guys that don't buy into the team concept and don't play defense, David Lee and Renaldo excepted of course.

You're not getting the definition of "bad contract". It's not analogous to "big contract". There are plenty of players on big contracts who perform. It's big contract for an extremely underperforming player. You can't get return on those contracts. You need to either buy them out, or dump them for cap space to go and get the players you want. I don't think the Knicks are averse at all to paying a big payroll for players who perform, but you can't go from anic to Princess Cruise Lines ship in one step. No one is going to give you a big contract, performing player for your big contract deadbeat.

[itzsoweezee]

Why do the Knicks have to get under the cap? They can afford to pay the luxury tax. Fiscal discipline isn't necessary for them to return to contention.

The problem isn't the bad contracts, it's that those contracts are attached to underachieving performances. And the roster that they've assembled is full of selfish guys that don't buy into the team concept and don't play defense, David Lee and Renaldo excepted of course. They can win a le with a $100 million payroll. I don't understand why he goes on and on about how New York has to get under the cap. They operate in a different economic reality than most teams. If anything, assuming Dolan wasn't the owner, being GM of the Knicks would actually be an easy job, because you wouldn't have to worry about paying the luxury tax in assembling a roster.

you're right, money is not an issue for the knicks. it's just been bad decisions regarding personnel and bad coaching. chad ford is an idiot.

[JamStone]

I agree about trying to get out of salary cap . There isn't a problem with paying the luxury tax. And, it's not like they'll be able to get under the cap to sign a superstar unless they basically trade all their big contract players for expiring contracts, which they wouldn't be able to anyway. And, the thing with big contracts, in this day and age of the NBA, sometimes bad contracts are useful in brokering a deal for another player with a big contract. If a team doesn't have cap space, the best way to bring in proven talent is to trade for them. Having all of these bad contracts, with some getting towards the one or two last years on their deal can actually be beneficial.

I agree with trading Curry or Randolph and for me it should be Curry. Eddy Curry has more trade value than Randolph, and actually Randolph is capable of playing a little more uptempo with the Knicks guards. Curry cannot play uptempo at all. Plus, at least occasionally, Randolph rebounds. Curry is a horrible rebounder, especially defensively.

[Kamnik]

first step-GET A REAL COACH

not some lousy GM-coach wannabe