TheGame wrote:... then we are idiots. There is an 80% chance Morris leaves this offseason and the Knicks can probably get a 1st round pick for him in a trade. He is 30 and while he seems like a good mentor, he just does not fit the time line for this team. Plus, I think we could still resign him this offseason even if we trade him. Keeping Morris would be the worst move the Knicks could make and would be a clear sign Mills and Perry are more worried about their jobs than the future of the Knicks.

Because he is a free agent, that first round pick might be a stretch. Has to be a team with a very short term need AND has the ability to make that trade and take in salary. Fans and Blogs are throwing this around like its a given.

As for his position he is a much better shooter than I thought he’d be. He is no prime time closer. Good player and I hope we have a place for him but at what price.
My issue with Randle is he is not a 1st option player. Other than that I like him.

knicks1248 wrote:

TheGame wrote:... then we are idiots. There is an 80% chance Morris leaves this offseason and the Knicks can probably get a 1st round pick for him in a trade. He is 30 and while he seems like a good mentor, he just does not fit the time line for this team. Plus, I think we could still resign him this offseason even if we trade him. Keeping Morris would be the worst move the Knicks could make and would be a clear sign Mills and Perry are more worried about their jobs than the future of the Knicks.

Your presuming that

1) This F/O will remain in place, which is highly unlikely at the rate we're loosing

2) That the youngsters we have (who continue to struggle and show very little progress) will remain a knick, which is also highly unlikely.

So the timeline theory goes right out the window, and it's very ridiculous that you said that because the last time I checked..the spurs Had a roster full of Vets when they drafted tim duncan, Kobe had shaq also had a roster full of vets, Kwahi, Wade, LBJ.

I agree that Randle and Morris is not a good MIX on this roster, but if you added a stretch Center, and a PG that could shoot from deep consistently and penetrate it changes everything.

IMO Mitch is more of a problem than Morris, he's so one dimensional. The person guarding Mitch always has the ability to guard him and protect the paint.

Payton, frank, and Mitch should not be on the same roster, those 3 guys wreck havoc on our spacing, you don't have to guard them on the perimeter, so guess what their defender is doing, helping out elsewhere, crowding randle, and killing the pick and roll

You make some good points. The question is how to get a stretch center and that elusive PG. That execution is not as easy as identifying.
When randle is hot you see how he can stretch the floor. WE can get this from the PF. Gibson has a decent midrange game and this is why he starts. But he can't go starter minutes and the future it not his.
But you can see what they are trying to do. Mitch is 21. He can be on the roster but can he exist with Randle. He can when Randle is shooting well. His midrange game is solid.
What Randle needs better is moving without the ball. MY take is he can be a great 3rd or 4th option player. Issue is the first three spots are not filled !!!!
Morris is also a role player of sorts.
The knicks have a lot of holes to fill. The youngsters? Some will stick and some won't. Logic. Front office? YOur guess is as good as mine. That's not saying much.

TPercy wrote:Why can't we relegate Randle to bench?

I mean you can, the question is why hasn't he been relegated and what benefit would it get you versus what you lose

TheGame wrote:... then we are idiots. There is an 80% chance Morris leaves this offseason and the Knicks can probably get a 1st round pick for him in a trade. He is 30 and while he seems like a good mentor, he just does not fit the time line for this team. Plus, I think we could still resign him this offseason even if we trade him. Keeping Morris would be the worst move the Knicks could make and would be a clear sign Mills and Perry are more worried about their jobs than the future of the Knicks.

Why do you think there's an 80% chance he leaves? What proof do you have around that? He's not young but his game should age well. And he's literally the only player on this team that can shoot. I'd rather keep him than Randle, regardless of age.

TPercy wrote:

martin wrote:

TPercy wrote:Why can't we relegate Randle to bench?

I mean you can, the question is why hasn't he been relegated and what benefit would it get you versus what you lose

Because the alternatives are really bad. I'd rather Randle than Portis. Now that Bullock is healthy tho I would like to see us with
Payton/Frank
Bullock/Dotson
Barrett/Knox
Morris/Randle
Robinson/Gibson

Me too. I really think eventually if you upgrade the PG position that is a much improved, and much better balanced lineup.

Going in next year i'd like to see a lineup of

C Robinson
F Morris
F Barrett
G Bullock or Bogdanovic or Joe Harris
G VanVleet or Cole Anthony or Tyrese Haliburton

arkrud wrote:Morris does not like man players with "female tendencies".
Too straight for NY. It is liberal city.
Randle looks like more diverse dude.
Lets keep him instead...

I'm real impressed with the diverse ways Randle turns the ball over. Catches, spin moves, passes....a couple of backcourt violations and his game will be complete.

knicks1248 wrote:

TheGame wrote:... then we are idiots. There is an 80% chance Morris leaves this offseason and the Knicks can probably get a 1st round pick for him in a trade. He is 30 and while he seems like a good mentor, he just does not fit the time line for this team. Plus, I think we could still resign him this offseason even if we trade him. Keeping Morris would be the worst move the Knicks could make and would be a clear sign Mills and Perry are more worried about their jobs than the future of the Knicks.

Your presuming that

1) This F/O will remain in place, which is highly unlikely at the rate we're loosing

2) That the youngsters we have (who continue to struggle and show very little progress) will remain a knick, which is also highly unlikely.

So the timeline theory goes right out the window, and it's very ridiculous that you said that because the last time I checked..the spurs Had a roster full of Vets when they drafted tim duncan, Kobe had shaq also had a roster full of vets, Kwahi, Wade, LBJ.

I agree that Randle and Morris is not a good MIX on this roster, but if you added a stretch Center, and a PG that could shoot from deep consistently and penetrate it changes everything.

IMO Mitch is more of a problem than Morris, he's so one dimensional. The person guarding Mitch always has the ability to guard him and protect the paint.

Payton, frank, and Mitch should not be on the same roster, those 3 guys wreck havoc on our spacing, you don't have to guard them on the perimeter, so guess what their defender is doing, helping out elsewhere, crowding randle, and killing the pick and roll

1. I am not assuming this FO will remain in place. In fact, my point is that the FO will focus on short term success rather than making moves that help the team long term.

2. RJ and Mitch are going to be here for next two years unless some unexpected deal opens up. The rest of the young guys are too unknown as to their potential to be a deciding factor at this point. Your analogy of the spurs merely shows your own ignorance. The spurs were a contending team two years before Duncan and then David Robinson got hurt and the next season was lost. The spurs lost bad that season and lucked into drafting duncan. They then went on to contend again. The Knicks are so far from where the Spurs were that it is not even funny. Comparing us to the spurs is a ridiculous example. The same thing goes for your other examples. This team was a 17 win last year and is going to probably be a 22-26 win team this season. We are not one-two players away from contending unless those players are Shaq and Kobe. It is likely going to be another 2-4 year process as Mitch and RJ develop and hopefully one of the other young’s proves to be a quality starter.

While none of us know what the Knicks are being offered, I would find it hard to believe that no team is willing to offer a 1st rounder for Morris with the way he is playing this year. Even if the Knicks got two second rounders, it still would be a solid deal. There is no guarantee we can keep Morris this summer, and while he is soaking up minutes, Knox and iggy are not getting max run. we need to trade Morris to maximize his value for the team’s future.

Plus, we still could resign him this summer if we really wanted to keep him past this season but I would only resign him on a one year over pay type deal that preserved our future flexibility.

“Knicks would be stupid to not trade him”. Since we deem the Knicks in this way, “Stupid”, then we are already assigning blame to further he agenda that we need new leadership.
Or you can sound like an elitist homer like me that might give the benefit of the doubt that a trade might not come to fruition blame is not always assignable unless its to quell or frustration. Thus:

1. Nalod advocates a Morris trade because I don’t think he is the answer.
2. I’m not sold that there are teams that can absorb his salary cap wise AND give us a first round pick. To do so will require taking back salary likely into next year.
3. If true, we limit our cap flex. Since we cant see with great clarity how that sakes out and we all down on our favorite team its will no doubt resonate “same old ****”.
4. Doing nothing is not the same old shyt. Its the panic moves that hurt.
5. All Nalodian word salad. We phuched either way.