New York Knicks Fan Page Forums

I know this is very disrespectful but I think winning is a tangible quality in a player's attributes specifically in regard to the impact they have on a teams' dynamics. David Lee may have all the stats of an All-Star but he will never be one because he doesn't have the indomitable spirit required to overpower his opponent. It's something that keeps you saying David Lee is consistent, as Clyde says over and over, but not awesome. I hope, for the long term cap's sake, knick's brass do not believe this is a building block. Lee is a MLE player at best.

To put it into perspective I believe this year's team to be no better than those earlier last decade with Weatherspoon on them. I wouldn't value Lee over said undersized center/PF either. Though the statistics would favor Lee, the teams are just about the same in terms of capability and performance. Lee doesn't give you anything beyond what Weatherspoon did. They both can make plays but neither has the ability to exert control throughout the course of a game.

I share a similar sentiment.

Lee has lots of tools and good skills, but he's just not going to dominate other bigs like how Chris Bosh or Amare Stoudemire have the ability to. On a championship caliber team, Lee would be no higher ranked than your 4th best player, IMO. I'm not gonna say Lee is not a winner, but he needs to be with a better team.

I agree.

Doesn't have it on D.

But just because he's not worth 8-10 mil here doesn't mean he wouldn't be on another team. Portland, OKC, Houston, Dallas and Miami could all really use him.

He just happens to not be what we need.

I hate this winner and loser talk. David lee can do everything but play defense. There is a bunch of guys like that in the league but you label them winners because they happen to have all stars around them. Would Boozer, david west and even amare be 'winners' if they were surrounded by nate, harrington and chandler??

Sundov=NextMJ wrote:I hate this winner and loser talk. David lee can do everything but play defense*. There is a bunch of guys like that in the league but you label them winners because they happen to have all stars around them. Would Boozer, david west and even amare be 'winners' if they were surrounded by nate, harrington and chandler??

* And make his teammates better.

nah, he leads all centers and even power forwards in assists. he was a winner in decemeber, back when we were playing good team d.

his deficiency is on defense, he's just not an "anchor" guy. we need to get that type of defender in the pivot. he's a pf being asked to play c and be the most consistent player on an unreliable team. keep him if his salary is not exhorbitant, build around him. he will continue to improve each year, so don't quit on him yet.

now having said that, he's not 100% indispensable. if donnie can land a bonafide all-star like bosh, joe johnson, then i'd say he's tradeable. he's one of the few assets that we have, that other teams want.

i cant wait to see this topic in a year when lee is on a winning team averaging a double double

Comparing Lee to Weatherspoon? Come on....really.....that is just crazy talk.

We need more than just David Lee to play well in order to win. He's doing as much as he can.

I've gotten over his defense, because I dont think Amare or even Bosh is that much better (Bosh is a bit better, but Amare's just as bad). My biggest problem with Lee is the offensive rebounds he gives up late in games. He doesn't have that extra gear in the 4th quarter. You cant be the same player in the 4th as you were in the 1st. We gave up points and possessions because he waited for rebounds to come to him and didn't box out. It's not what you expect out of a winner

Isn't it obvious that Jeffries and Duhon are losers?

I agree halfway. Lee is a starting role player but still a good starter or piece that with a player of Bosh or Duncans caliber would be winning games. I dont know why we gotta bash the guy for it. He's doing all he can and can do alittle of everything but he just doesnt have any help down there.

Its like having top of the line tires with no car to put them on. TYhe question is do you then deem the tires useless or do you go buy a car. Lee's that reliable tire, it just so happpens we need a car. What I will say is that if the tires are so expensive that you cant afford a car then you should buy the car first and at thye end whatever money you have left see if you can still afford thoise great tires or do you have to just get middle of the line tires. Lebron and Bosh is the car.

I hope that makes sense but I'm not about to throw Lee under the bus. He is working hard but we know our goal. To get 2 max FA's. If we got a chance to do so we have to. If we can only get one then we should grab Lee. I wouldnt purposely pass on two so I can keep Lee but at the same time I wouldnt just not resign Lee because he's supposedly not some winner.

David Lee isn't a defender, surround him with 4 guys who are ... all the sudden he'd be a winner. I wouldn't pay 10 million for a guy who doesn't D up but someone may, I'd give him 7.5 to start and say take it, leave it, or learn to defend.

Remember when Jamal Crawford wasn't a winner? This is the stupidest discussion. Slava Medvedenko is a winner because he was lucky enough to play with Shaq at his prime and a young Kobe Bryant, but Lee is a loser because he's been stuck on a floundering franchise. Lee was the No. 30 overall pick in the 2004 NBA Draft. Needless to say we didn't draft this guy to be a franchise player or even to be the very good, borderline All-Star he is now. At that point in a draft if you can find a consistent starting caliber player you should consider yourself lucky, forget a guy averaging a double-double for his career.

As a huge Lee enthusiast, I couldn't help but think the same thing myself. But I have to agree with the people that say surround him with some real talent, and see how he does. He averages about 5 assists a game so I don't know how you can say he doesn't help his teammates.

H20 touched on my biggest issue with him and it's boxing out. He was getting bitched around by Thompson and that other big, white bruiser on the Kings last night. Granted that big white guy (can't remember his name) was pushing off on every single rebound, but Lee has to assert himself more. No, he's not the biggest guy, but for a well known rebounder, he doesn't have that angry switch to tell guys to back the fuck off.

But ever since he's been on the Knicks the franchise has been in shambles. Give him a decent roster, which is what I believe Walsh is here to do, and see how he does. That's why I think he's worth resigning. His offensive skills are mesmerizing. He's got game, and works his ass off in the offseason to improve his deficiencies. You never, ever have to question his effort, unlike some other jokes on the team. Take Chris Duhon off the team, the weakest starting center in the league in Jeffries, and Al Chuckington, and let's see how the team does.

And Gallo needs to get his game back.

C'mon guys. Seriously, what else do you want from the guy? He's doing everything he can do. 20 and 15 on pretty much any given night. He cant do it all by himself. He's pretty much all by himself down there in the post. He needs another 'big man' beside him, someone better than Jared Jeffries.

I want Lee in NY.

Yep, find a real C and PG to play alongside him and we will have a winning combo

Okay the Medvedenko winner comparison is totally off base as is a lot of the posts that say Lee would be a winner if he got 4 guys that can win. No fellas, the point of my post was to say if you pay someone above the MLE range, say 7-12 mil a year, than you can't just have a guy who fills up a stat sheet. You expect you would be getting a player that could exert control over the game at timely junctures. I don't really want to dispute or agree with Lee's usefulness on other teams. But for this Knick team he has shown the tendency to disappear or be the guy watching on the ground while we get creamed late in games. I mean in last nights game Thompson showed athleticism light years beyond Lee in several points during the Kings come back. I don't care if you shoot 10-15 FG your first 30 mins...but if you only get 2 shots in your last 12 mins and the team loses, that paints a very clear picture of what you are bringing to the table in terms of winning. This story is the last 5 years. Close game, nobody has any guts to grasp control of the game on the Knicks, we lose by a few points and wonder what could have been. The kool-aid is sour smelling at this point.

Lee will never be Oakley. He won't even be Kurt Thomas, Marcus Camby, or Anthony Mason. Those bigs were paid well by the Knicks for bringing something that Lee just doesn't have: A grit and resilience to overpower their opponent defensively. He certainly has offense, and so did Rick Smits, but if there is ever going to be a change for the last ten years of pathetic finishes to games we need incredible defense and reliable toughness at the 4/5 position. Lee does not fit this bill for the Knicks.

David Lee is a good player, but I somewhat agree. He isn't going to be the be the defender out there, however he has the work ethic to improve those areas. That to me is the only flaw to his game...defense.

DerekHarper wrote:Okay the Medvedenko winner comparison is totally off base as is a lot of the posts that say Lee would be a winner if he got 4 guys that can win. No fellas, the point of my post was to say if you pay someone above the MLE range, say 7-12 mil a year, than you can't just have a guy who fills up a stat sheet. You expect you would be getting a player that could exert control over the game at timely junctures. I don't really want to dispute or agree with Lee's usefulness on other teams. But for this Knick team he has shown the tendency to disappear or be the guy watching on the ground while we get creamed late in games. I mean in last nights game Thompson showed athleticism light years beyond Lee in several points during the Kings come back. I don't care if you shoot 10-15 FG your first 30 mins...but if you only get 2 shots in your last 12 mins and the team loses, that paints a very clear picture of what you are bringing to the table in terms of winning. This story is the last 5 years. Close game, nobody has any guts to grasp control of the game on the Knicks, we lose by a few points and wonder what could have been. The kool-aid is sour smelling at this point.

Lee will never be Oakley. He won't even be Kurt Thomas, Marcus Camby, or Anthony Mason. Those bigs were paid well by the Knicks for bringing something that Lee just doesn't have: A grit and resilience to overpower their opponent defensively. He certainly has offense, and so did Rick Smits, but if there is ever going to be a change for the last ten years of pathetic finishes to games we need incredible defense and reliable toughness at the 4/5 position. Lee does not fit this bill for the Knicks.

Oakley, Mason and all the guys you mentioned never took over a game in thier lives. I know, I watched them. You hear people worship Houston and Spree, I worshiped Ewing and Starks. I mean I loved all those guys you mentioned but without Ewing they were a bunch of gritty yes, but very average talent players. I know I'll get killed for this but our team was like putting Tim Duncan with a team of Balkmans, Perkins,Pietrus types.....all guys you wanna have on a championship team but in no way the reason why they win singularly. They were grunts. And if you wanna say that Lee is an offensive Grunt then I'll agree but I wouldnt diminish or raise the value of that based on one skill. Everyone looks smarter or more tough when they arent the number one scoring option. We dont have one, let that happen and you'll be changing yer tune. Or we can just let Lee walk for 2 FA's


Why do we always deal in absolutes. Someone either has to be a franchise player or they suck. Fact is Lee is a good player who would compliment a superstar very nicely. True superstars play offense AND defense and then you surround both of them with those gritty players you mentioned and youre fine. Besides last I checked oakley isnt wearing a ring, nor is Camby. I'm not trying to say they didnt give it thier all but I'm just saying that your argument is weak if thats who youre comparing him too.