Sessions Update:Ramon signs T-Wolves OS (page 310 update)

blueedwards · Post #1101 » by **blueedwards** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 5:54 pm

I still think Boozer is going to Miami. Probably a 3 team trade. We do have buyouts and ng players yet. Could see something like KT bought out at 50%,Bowens dropped at 50%,Stoudamire dropped,Elson expiring to Jazz,Jazz send Boozer to Miami and we get Haslem and Blunt. Haslem would start for us at pf. Both are expirings. So win win for us. Then match any offer for Sessions and offseason is completed. I could see the Suns get in on this if they didnt cut Pavlovic yet. Could see KT going to Suns and Pavs to Jazz as a 4 team deal.

Ayt · Post #1102 » by **Ayt** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:49 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Didn't he also move an unprotected pick for Eddy Curry to the Bulls? So he moved three first rounders for Curry and Marbury?

In the Curry trade, the Bulls got the #2 pick in 2006 and they were able to swap picks in 2007 (#9 pick to the Bulls for the #23 pick).

LUKE23 · Post #1103 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:50 pm

Frank Isola reports that "within one day or two," Donnie Walsh is expected to decide between making a contract offer to Jamaal Tinsley or Ramon Sessions.

Tinsley is an unrestricted free-agent who will command a smaller salary than the restricted free-agent Sessions. If the Knicks make an offer to Sessions, the Bucks would have seven days to match.

It was reported earlier that Walsh and Bucks' GM John Hammond spoke on Wednesday to discuss a possible sign-and-trade.

http://www.nydailynews.com

Still haven't found exact link, got this from the Knicks board. If the Knicks do sign Tinsley, then Sessions is pretty much completely out of options for a MLE deal, IMO.

Newz · Post #1104 » by **Newz** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:51 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
Frank Isola reports that "within one day or two," Donnie Walsh is expected to decide between making a contract offer to Jamaal Tinsley or Ramon Sessions.

Tinsley is an unrestricted free-agent who will command a smaller salary than the restricted free-agent Sessions. If the Knicks make an offer to Sessions, the Bucks would have seven days to match.

It was reported earlier that Walsh and Bucks' GM John Hammond spoke on Wednesday to discuss a possible sign-and-trade.

http://www.nydailynews.com

Still haven't found exact link, got this from the Knicks board. If the Knicks do sign Tinsley, then Sessions is pretty much completely out of options for a MLE deal, IMO.

I'll believe it when I see it.

europa · Post #1105 » by **europa** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:53 pm

If the Knicks plan is to make a big splash in 2010, signing Tinsley makes more sense than Sessions because he'll be cheaper. I still think Walsh is leaning in that direction with D'Antoni pushing for Sessions. Just a guess, but it doesn't sound like Hammond or Walsh found a S&T to their liking.

trwi7 · Post #1106 » by **trwi7** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:00 pm

Jamaal Tinsley is prepared to sign with the Knicks ... assuming Donnie Walsh is willing to make him an offer.

A source close to the free agent point guard said that Tinsley will commit to the Knicks, even it means accepting less money than other teams may offer, because he wants to be reunited with Walsh and play in New York.

Friends say that Tinsley is eager to play again and resurrect his reputation following the team-imposed exile. A decision on whether to sign Tinsley will fall on D'Antoni since he will have to deal with the veteran guard on a day-to-day basis.

D'Antoni, according to sources, would prefer to make a run at Milwaukee free agent point guard Ramon Sessions.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baske ... nsley.html

LUKE23 · Post #1107 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:01 pm

Either way, I think we'll know by Saturday if Sessions is getting an offer.

PkrsBcksGphsMqt · Post #1108 » by **PkrsBcksGphsMqt** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:12 pm

I haven't had time to read most of this tread. So, if Tinsley signs with the Knicks are there really any other realistic options for Sessions? I don't think he'll take the QO, so then how much do we offer him? Something a little more than we offered Ersan? This has played out wonderfully so far, nice work johnny boy.

blueedwards · Post #1109 » by **blueedwards** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:15 pm

GreenBayBucks wrote:I haven't had time to read most of this tread. So, if Tinsley signs with the Knicks are there really any other realistic options for Sessions? I don't think he'll take the QO, so then how much do we offer him? Something a little more than we offered Ersan? This has played out wonderfully so far, nice work johnny boy.

Philly could be. But there not that interested like the Knicks or Clippers. So seems like Sessions is a lock for us now. Unless Donnie comes back with a sweet offer for Hammond.

PkrsBcksGphsMqt · Post #1110 » by **PkrsBcksGphsMqt** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:19 pm

blueedwards wrote:Philly could be. But there not that interested like the Knicks or Clippers. So seems like Sessions is a lock for us now. Unless Donnie comes back with a sweet offer for Hammond.

Thanks. Seems like were set up for a win/win situation. Get Sessions cheap or get get a nice package (is that even possible?) from the Knicks.

blueedwards · Post #1111 » by **blueedwards** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:48 pm

I doubt they trade Hill which they just drafted. Also Lee would be nice but at the right price tag. But he's asking alot like $10M per or more. Kinda risky in the long run especially when next years draft crop is full of decent bigs. Our luck we S&T Session for Lee some how and be paying Lee at $10M then our rookie pf next year is a beast at a fraction of the cost. Thats what im worried about the most.

europa · Post #1112 » by **europa** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:01 pm

John Hollinger provides more reasons why we don't need to worry about the Sixers pursuing Sessions in his chat today:

Matt (White Haven, PA)
Are the Sixers still in the league? Will they actually go into the season with Williams and Holiday at the point?

John Hollinger
(4:00 PM)
Yes, they'll sign a third point guard (Carlos Arroyo, I'm guessing) and go into the season with that. Philly has NO money -- they're already at next year's tax line and their revenue has cratered the past couple years.

MartyConlonOnTheRun · Post #1113 » by **MartyConlonOnTheRun** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:03 pm

What a difference a year makes. Philly seemed like real players last year.

skones · Post #1114 » by **skones** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:04 pm

LUKE23 wrote:Last year Bogut and Lee had basically the same rebounding rate. Defensively, Lee allowed a 21+ PER at PF. I dont' know where rankings are, but that is monumentally horrendous.

You've stated this numerous times in this thread but have completely taken it out of context in order for it to better fit your own argument. What you neglected to mention is that Lee played 4% of the available minutes at PF and 66% of the available minutes at Center. 4% is a minute sample size, and without overtimes factored in, that's 157 minutes throughout the 82 game season. When you average that out, that comes to LESS THAN TWO MINUTES PER GAME AT POWER FORWARD. Therefore, when you sit there and use that as data to support your argument, you're reaching, and you're reaching really far here.

The New York defensive system forces it's big men to switch on nearly every screen often leaving guys like Lee out on the perimeter to defend ones, twos, and threes. Obviously, that's a terrible matchup for 99% of the big men in this league as they'll either bite hard on a pump fake or simply be blown past off of the dribble. This is another reason why Lee's defensive shortcomings are overly exposed by the data for this particular season.

As a rookie in 2005-2006, Lee allowed a 19.7 opponent PER to opposing power forwards. During the 2006-2007 season, David Lee allowed a 13.7 opponent PER to power forwards. In 2007-2008, David Lee posted an 18.0 opponent PER at the power forward position. In saying things like, he's a bottom 5 defender in the league, or at least as a big man, you're once again, drastically overstating your own point.

In my opinion, and it is no secret, Lee is far below average defensively at center which is a position he won't be needed much at if Bogut stays healthy and we've got guys like Elson, Johnson, and Gadzuric to provide valuable backup minutes. Despite his shortcomings at that position, I believe him to be an average defender at the power forward, ESPECIALLY when being paired with a guy like Bogut who can rotate over and block some shots if needed.

What you are seemingly failing to realize is that by bringing in his top notch rebounding to our ball club, we become better defensively by cleaning up the glass and really limiting 2nd chance opportunities for the opposing teams while adding a few of our own. With Skiles help, I think Lee could make himself into a slightly above average NBA defender.

Post #1115 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:12 pm

Skones post was great.

David Lee and his skills are not some imaginary NBA2kLive video game illusion or something just created by D'Antoni last season. For the past three years the guy has been an elite rebounder in different systems. As a matter of fact, two years ago it looked like he might turn out to be a better player from that draft than Bogut until Andrew got it turned around.

Put him at PF and I think we'd own the glass.

blueedwards · Post #1116 » by **blueedwards** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:18 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:Skones post was great.

David Lee and his skills are not some imaginary NBA2kLive video game illusion or something just created by D'Antoni last season. For the past three years the guy has been an elite rebounder in different systems. As a matter of fact, two years ago it looked like he might turn out to be a better player from that draft than Bogut until Andrew got it turned around.

Put him at PF and I think we'd own the glass.

Probably like when we had Magloire and Bogut. Both as a total were close to 25-30 boards a game some nights. 8-)

Would be very competitive for Bogut to make sure he keeps on boarding and have no coasting games. Even though he was more consistant last year before injury.

europa · Post #1117 » by **europa** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:18 pm

I've been a fan of Lee's for years. I also agree he'd be a very good fit next to Bogut. My concern is the cost. I think it will take at least 4/$32M to get him interested in the Bucks and likely more. I'm not comfortable paying him that much on top of losing Sessions. Given all the convoluted ways it would take to get Lee in a S&T for Sessions, I'm fairly certain this is all a moot point anyway.

skones · Post #1118 » by **skones** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:21 pm

europa wrote:I've been a fan of Lee's for years. I also agree he'd be a very good fit next to Bogut. My concern is the cost. I think it will take at least 4/$32M to get him interested in the Bucks and likely more. I'm not comfortable paying him that much on top of losing Sessions. Given all the convoluted ways it would take to get Lee in a S&T for Sessions, I'm fairly certain this is all a moot point anyway.

I don't think Lee has a lot of leverage at this point when it comes to getting him interested in a deal. Without a sign and trade on the table do you think the Knicks pay Lee 8 million a year to keep him? I'm not sure, but I wouldn't put my money on it.

Max Green · Post #1119 » by **Max Green** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:33 pm

If the Knicks chose TInsley over Ramon, then Chubby better hope Hammond even considers a 4yr/16m deal.

LUKE23 · Post #1120 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:41 pm

I disagree he's a strong fit next to Bogut. I think a strong fit next to Bogut is a guy who can block some shots and space the floor. Yes, he can rebound, but we're already a very strong rebounding roster, IMO.

I believe Sessions ability to create offense and get to the line far trumps what Lee would bring us. Doesn't matter, Sessions for Lee won't (and pretty much can't) happen anyway.