Since the Knicks haven’t played since Monday, there hasn’t been too much to talk about. But, there have been a number of articles about the financial state of the league.
Last year 12 of the 30 NBA franchises posted an operating loss. And, it’s not looking any better thus far this year as NBA ticket revenues are down over 7%. The worst hit? Detroit, with revenues down a whopping 42%. The Pistons are a middle of the pack team at 10-12. Meanwhile, the financially profitable Bulls (7-13), are having all sorts of problems on the court stemming from the loss of Ben Gordon to free agency. Do the Pistons and Bulls undo their mistakes from this past summer and find a way to get Gordon back to the Bulls, while alleviating what are looking like some serious financial losses for the Pistons? Do the Pistons opt to go another route and trade Rip Hamilton, who’s making $12 mil per for another 4 years?
Other teams losing a lot of money:
The Sacramento Kings (average gate receipts down 36.2 percent), Minnesota Timberwolves (down 24.4 percent), Phoenix Suns (down 23.8 percent), Los Angeles Clippers (down 23.3 percent), Milwaukee Bucks (down 23.2 percent), and Golden State Warriors (down 22.3 percent). Clearly, the Suns’ bottom line has not benefited from the team’s 15-7 start, nor have the Bucks been able to translate excitement over rookie point guard Brandon Jennings into ticket revenue.
Would the Kings be willing to talk Nate and/or Jeffries? Not sure what would work or if that would be in the Knicks interests.
How about this: Can the Knicks take Razor Ramon Sessions off Minny’s hands, or even pry Rubio loose? The Knicks could do Sessions (4 years @ 3.7 mil this year) and Mark Blount ($8 mil expiring) — a total of $26 mil in outgoing contracts — for Nate ($4 mil expiring) and Jeffries ($6.5 mil, 1 year left), taking back $17 mil and realizing $9 million in savings and added cap flexibility this summer. Not too bad. Meanwhile, the Knicks will have shed $3 mil from their 2010 commitments which doesn’t sound like much, but could be the difference between a second tier star and a max contract worthy player. Plus, we’d add some much needed PG depth.
Additionally, I’m not sure how Monta Ellis hasn’t been traded yet with the Warriors revenues being down 22% thus far this year. Is he someone the Knicks should go after? Would you trade Eddy Curry for Monta Ellis ($11 mil per for 5 years)? It’s a 2010 neutral trade, but would save GS $33 mil in long term savings. Would GS be financially desperate enough to go this route? Would adding Wilson Chandler or Jordan Hill make the deal a little more likely?
Maybe, even more fantastic. Would GS blow it up and do…
— Beidrins ($9 mil per for 4 more years) — a perfect center for D’Antoni
— Ellis ($11 mil per 4 more years)
— $100 mil outgoing for GS
— $19 mil in committed 2010 salary
For:
— Curry ($10.5 mil and 1 more year)
— Jared Jeffries ($6.5 and for 1 more)
— Jordan Hill ($2.5 mil for 1 more year, plus team options)
— Wilson Chandler ($1.3 mil for and 1 more year, plus team options)
— $42 mil in outgoing salary for the Knicks
— $22.8 mil in committed 2010 salary
The logic for Golden State: They effectively save $58 mil in long term salaries (not incl. team options). They get rid of a disgruntled star while freeing up space for future franchise guy, Stephen Curry. To top it off, they get 2 promising young players in Hill and Chander, as well as some needed low post scoring (potentially) in Eddy.
The logic for the Knicks: We get two excellent uptempo players at positions of need — a serious scoring threat at PG and a true shot blocker and rebounding center. AND, most beautifully of all, Donnie saves $3.8 mil in 2010 salaries.
The Knicks this year would look like this, post-GS-trade:
PG: Ellis
SG: Hughes
SF: Gallo
PF: Lee
C: Beidrins
Bench: Harrington / Duhon / Douglas / Nate / Darko
The Warriors would look something like:
PG: Steph Curry
SG: Maggette
SF: Chandler
PF: Randolph
C: Turiaf
Bench: Eddy / Jeffries / J. Hill / Morrow / Raja Bell / Radman / Azubuike (injured)
You know, that ain’t half bad either for GS. And, the franchise would stand to save $58 million! That is awesome!! DO IT, Donnie!!!!!
#1 by AY on December 11, 2009 - 3:24 pm
Quote
You’re right that this is the kind of mega-trade that could very well go on to clear out Jeffries/Curry. It reminds me of an Isiah trade. And the Warriors are definitely a possible trading partner if it comes to it. I wonder when Donnie will give up on trading Jeffries/Curry for expirings and go to Plan B of trade them for half-expirings and half-deals that go on? When that happens, it’s on!
I just noticed that Philly’s trying to trade Dalembert, whose contract is the same as Eddy’s. It’s kind of a bad sign, because teams would much rather Sam than Eddy if they’re willing to take on money.
You know there’s going to be a deal. Almost sure to be traded – Nate, Darko
You could definitely see it – Hughes, Harrington, Jeffries, Curry
Unlikely but maybe if the deal’s right – Chandler, Lee
Nah – Gallo, TD, Hill (value’s too low right now), Duhon (kind of necessary and no value)
#2 by YesandtheFoul on December 11, 2009 - 3:49 pm
Quote
I always figured you’d have to trade Curry and Jeffries separately, like you’d be lucky to find a taker for just one of them, but this scenario actually makes sense. I just have a hard time imagining Donnie having the imagination for this big of a deal. All of his Knicks trades so far have been pretty straight forward for 1 or 2 players deals. Taking back 2 players with 5 years and $100 mil is pretty ballsy, and isn’t something you think of doing when you’re so focused on 2010 free agency. But, the beautiful part of the deal is the Knicks actually save about $3.8 mil in 2010 cap space.
#3 by YesandtheFoul on December 11, 2009 - 4:12 pm
Quote
Great ESPN daily dime link about players becoming trade eligible this coming week (featuring Nate at the top of the ‘most likely’ list):
http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-091112-13/weekend-dime-players-soon-trade-eligible