I was in the car today listening to Michael Kay and Don La Greca on 1050 ESPN Radio in NY when they began discussing the Knicks’ plan of pursuing Lebron James in the summer of 2010. Both commentators stated that the Knicks putting all their chips on the table, and going all in for the Lebron Summer of 2010 sweepstakes was a flawed plan and that Knicks fans were the one suffering the consequences last year and will be this year as well.
Lebron isn't the only option available to the Knicks next summer.
Now I agree with both on a few of the statements they made. I agree that Lebron is more likely to stay in Cleveland than to come to New York. I also agree that the Knicks have mortgaged their immediate future in order to be a player in free agency during the summer of 2010.
That is the extent to any of the claims they made that I agree with. Let’s take a look at the fallacies behind their arguments.
1. Lebron will make more money in Cleveland than by coming to New York because the Cavaliers can offer a bigger contract.
This is true only on the surface. Cleveland has the advantage of being able to offer Lebron a sixth year on a contract, while the Knicks can only offer him a max contract over five years. Comparing the max contracts both teams could offer over the initial five years, Lebron would make a grand total of 4.14 million less if he came to the Knicks. When you’re making over $40 million a year including $28 million a year in endorsements I doubt that giving up a little less than $1 million a year over five years will matter much.
They also both went on to claim that since Lebron is already one of the most prominent athletes in the world, moving to New York would gain him little monetarily or in terms of recognition.
Coming to New York would certainly boost Lebron’s profile internationally to a level it is not at right now considering that his jersey sales in China rank No. 7. Lebron himself has stated he wants to become the first billionaire and certainly stands a better chance of accomplishing this is in New York with its large market and the exposure both nationally and internationally that it provides.
2. Lebron has a championship contender in Cleveland, something that the Knicks are far from being.
Once again on the surface there is nothing wrong with this statement. Last year the Cavaliers won 66 games and contended for an NBA Finals berth, while the Knicks went 32-50 and missed the playoffs for a fifth straight season.
Lebron's supporting cast in Cleveland is negligibly better than the Knicks' current roster.
Then again last year according to Basketball Prospectus Lebron was worth close to 27 wins to his team. Doing some simple math, that would mean that without Lebron James, the Cavaliers would have won 39 games last year. Even if you question the validity of advanced statistics, use some common sense and think to yourself how good Lebron’s supporting cast really is. It is slightly better than the Knicks’ roster, though they also lack some of the talented youth the Knicks have on their roster.
The Knicks are also in much better position to add talent immediately looking at their overall cap situation. It is true that with the salary cap slated to come down again next year the Knicks will most likely not be able to add another max contract player to their roster next summer. What many fail to realize is come around the summer of 2011 the Knicks will again have significant cap room with Eddy Curry and Jared Jeffries both having their contracts expire after the 2010-2011 season.
The Knicks can even use both those expiring contracts to acquire another player to put next to Lebron before the trade deadline if they want. Simply put long term the Knicks cap situation looks better than the Cavaliers cap situation in the long-term.
3. If the Knicks fail to land Lebron, the entire plan for rebuilding will be a failure.
To expand on this, Kay even went on to claim that if the Knicks landed Miami superstar Dwayne Wade, it would have been a failed strategy. Even if I tried to ignore the stupidity of that statement Kay then decided to say that point guards can not lead a team to a championship.
Knicks fans would be more than happy if Dwayne Wade came to New York instead of Lebron.
Two things. Dwayne Wade is a shooting guard and last time I checked he did lead the Miami Heat to a championship in the 2006 NBA Finals where he was named Finals MVP.
Wade is on record saying that he can’t see himself in New York, but if he did come I doubt any Knicks fan would be devastated with that result.
Even if Lebron does not come, the Knicks would still have the cap space to sign say perhaps a combination of Joe Johnson and Amare Stoudemire, two player who have played and thrived under Mike D’Antoni in Phoenix. With those two players, the expected development of the Knicks’ young players and the ability to sign another big free agent in the summer of 2011, the Knicks’ future would look very promising.
Even if the Knicks fail to sign a significant free agent next summer they will be in a much better situation than they were under the reign of former GM’s Isiah Thomas and Scott Layden. While I do believe there are some things current GM Donnie Walsh could have done better in his time in New York, overall he has delivered on his promise to get the Knicks under the cap sooner rather than later.
Perhaps this is why they say you can’t rebuild in New York. The most significant part of the Knicks’ rebuilding plan is not to sign Lebron James, but that they even have the ability too after a decade of poor cap management. Both Kay and La Greca fail to grasp several keys to the Knicks’ entire plan.
I hate to pile on both, because I generally enjoy their commentary, but when it comes to understanding the Knicks’ plans and what they have to entice Lebron neither Kay or La Greca come close.