In terms of acquiring assets, I am down if there is a good one available. Haywood is expiring this year as well and is 30. So doesn't really solve a problem long term and doesn't give us an asset next year. Hill I would not mind rolling the dice on, but the Knicks would want us to take back really bad contracts that would constrict our cap space long term.
As for Murphy, he doesn't really solve a problem, but he becomes a big asset next season. It's funny that people keep saying they don't want to "trade one of our best assets for Murphy" in K9 who has a 9 million dollar expiring. However, after Thursday, K9 will net us nothing and next year TM is an 11 million dollar expiring next year. Again, it's deferring an asset by one season. And in TM's case, he still has game left, so unlike K9, he can be alluring to a contending team as he can help them immediately and be an expiring. I see it as planning ahead.