Harrington for Crawford...or Rose?
The Knicks appear to be close to landing athletic forward Al Harrington in a trade that could send the team's leading scorer, Jamal Crawford, out to Oakland.
Details of the Harrington acquisition were only starting to slip out late last night -- Peter Vescey put something up on the Post's website at 2:44 a.m. -- and the only concrete piece of information so far is that the Knicks were getting Harrington.
ESPN's Ric Bucher a while back reported that Crawford, who leads the Knicks with 19.6 points per game, could be the Knick headed the other way. Late last night we heard the same from an NBA executive, though we can not confirm it.
Vescey suggested Malik Rose's expiring contract ($7.6 million) was the player going out to Oakland, which makes far more sense from a Knicks point of view.
The team is in Milwaukee to play the Bucks tonight.
Harrington, who has been sidelined after asking for a trade (I was told last night that Harrington's "back injury" was bogus, just a way to keep him away from the team), makes $9.2 million this season and $10.02 million in 2009-10.
Crawford makes $8.6 million this season and has an opt-out in July. If he picks up the option, he has two more years at $9.3 million and $10 million in 09-10 and 10-11. He fits more into what the Warriors like to do and would give them some needed scoring punch at the guard spot while Monta Ellis recovers from his ankle surgery. Ellis and Crawford could be a dangerous high-scoring tandem in the backcourt.
But if Crawford goes, what does that mean for their guard situation? Stephon Marbury remains exiled and tried to talk about a buyout with the team a week ago. If Crawford is dealt, does this mean Marbury plays?
Things will develop quickly today. Stay tuned.
E-mail
Facebook
Digg
Delicious
Comments (20)
I will cry of joy if Jamal Crawford is finally traded.
Sounds like one move in a series to me...we still need a shot blocking BIG!
If the Matador D continues, every night will be the Celtics game, replayed OVER and OVER again.
If Crawford did not have the opt out I would rather they didn't make the deal. Rose for Harrington would be good talent wise. I would rather see the Knicks trade Crawford as part of a deal for a legit athletic big man.
Alan raises an interesting point about Marbury, if Crawford is gone is he back in the rotation? Just seems like a lot of drama on deck if
he is in the lineup again. Then again Roberson would be moved up and he hasn't shown anything. Again, Crawford's opt out makes things complicated for Walsh.
a future first round pick + al harrington for crawford = DEAL
harrington for Malik = DEAL
Harrington for Crawford makes no sense at all (even though I would love to trade an inconsistent, no "D" player like Crawford for someone that wasn't so wildly overrated ). We would be short a guard unless we played Marbury (which would be perceived as mental retardation given developments since the start of the season) and create a log jam at forward. Harrington for Rose makes sense. It's a big uprade for us, we take on extra salary, but don't extend out long enough to kill the longer term plan.
Isiah would pull off the trade to acquire Harrington. You don't trade your most potent scorer for a back injured journeyman. Granted he is talented and brings defensive intensity and is brings back memoirs of Charles Smith trade. Ifyou trade Jamal you have to get an immediate impact player in return or a future first round pick. Malik is the best trade that doesn't effect team chemestry. You don't trade a starter for an injured player period.
No Malik . No trade. We can wait....
even tho Jamal is the better talent than Malik I'd rather the Jamal for Al deal.
GS putting in a first rounder would seal the deal.
I would think Q would get more minutes at the 2 if Jamal was dealt. Also, with Jeffries coming back that creates a log jam up front.
I guess this would put an end to Jamal's Newsday blog
Harrington's career numbers paint him as a much more consistent three point threat than Crawford. He fits better in this system, and also helps clear out cap space for 2010. Crawford has been great so far, but does anyone seriously expect him to keep it up?
This trade may also lead to another deal, where a front court piece (Lee or Randolph) heads elsewhere. Maybe the Randolph to the Clippers deal comes back alive, with a guy like Camby coming back (with filler, and ideally a young asset) - thus clearing out even more 2010 cap space.
I love it! We are finally making some deals to clear some 2010 cap room. Make this deal now and if it means we have to play Marbury then play him...We are paying him anyways..
Btw..It clears 2010 room because Jamal wasnt going to opt out..
Finally getting 2010 alive
with some Bulljive
they better not trade jamal !!!!!!!!!!!!!
he is still getting in the rhythm of the no-d 'antoni system and is STILL putting up good numbers in the transition. not to mention he is my fav knick. if it were for a shot blocking PF or C maybe but al harr is not that. he can score the rock but al just doesnt seem like he fits in the system that is suited for a cat like #11.
which guard will now start ??? NATE ??? he is the perfect sparkplug off the bench. starting guards will dismantle him.
p.s - alan posting really SUCKS on here...fix that security crap dawg! it is gettin worse........
A couple of thoughts on a Harrington trade. He’s a decent forward who can probably play both positions for D’A. He doesn’t do anything at an all-star level, but he won’t kill you either. If the Knicks can get him for Rose, it immediately improves the depth on the team. He doesn’t help the defensive problems – he’s athletic, but not the kind of game-changing athlete like Josh Smith or AK-47 who can protect the basket from the 3 spot. I agree with the posters who could see this as setting up another deal, especially since Walsh might see Harrington as making Lee (whose stock has to be dropping) expendable.
Jamal Crawford is a career loser, who doesn't know how to win or play big in games that count. He fills up his stats against crap teams, can't play in a system, and plays god awful defense. He sometimes seriously plays as if he's playing street ball, the way he jacks up crazy shots and goes one on one. He doesn't have the mental make-up to get it done in big games.
I think this is a move that needs to be made, this way the Knicks can find a better option at SG. PLUS this creates cap room, big time smart move.
ALAN I MUST SAY THIS IS INTERESTING
If crawford gets traded.. That means that it is not ALL about the future.. As far as clearing cap space it is.. But donnie walsh clearly said his goal was to clear cap space while remaining competitive for the next two years.. So if crawford a quote on quote "building block" for the future gets traded then what are you saying to marbury??? Were trynna develop Collins??? Lolol
They gotta play the Dude..If they trade crawford who's gonna be our 2 guard.. Collins? Just conspiring but holla if you feel me...
NOooooo. We don't want Rose or Crawford. You can keep them both. We only want Lee.
I think that given our PG situation right now--trading JC wouldn't necessarily be ideal. We are in desperate need of defense--and im sure Al could help somewhat in that dept--(some blogs are saying his back issues are bogus..but who knows?) But, for all his bad shot selections---JC has proven in the past to be that go-to guy in crunch time. He hasn't really shown it yet this season, but its still early.So, while we are looking to 2010, but trying to be competitive now I think he should stay. At least he will keep us on the edge of our seats, when he throws up that off-balance fadaway three to win the game lol.
I just hope that all this "clearing out" for 2010 lands us Lebron because if not we could be "clearing out" for a long time.
I think that given our PG situation right now--trading JC wouldn't necessarily be ideal. We are in desperate need of defense--and im sure Al could help somewhat in that dept--(some blogs are saying his back issues are bogus..but who knows?) But, for all his bad shot selections---JC has proven in the past to be that go-to guy in crunch time. He hasn't really shown it yet this season, but its still early.So, while we are looking to 2010, but trying to be competitive now I think he should stay. At least he will keep us on the edge of our seats, when he throws up that off-balance fadaway three to win the game lol.
I just hope that all this "clearing out" for 2010 lands us Lebron because if not we could be "clearing out" for a long time.
Sound like a shot in the dark to me.
We can't wait for 2010 to stop being winners.
Our fourth quarter is cleary our weekness, we can't seal the deal.
We need more defense JC is a great offensive player but even he tends to stand back and admire the other teams jumper.
harrington is a major upgrade on jamal in every aspect.
deal is done http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3717209