Loved him @ Kansas and I really like his Offensive explosiveness.

It's just I was always under the impression that he was an awful Defensive Player but a Knicks fan corrected me the other day, posted a whole bunch of elite advanced defensive statistics; and proved me wrong.

Did this (below) against an elite N.Y Defense too.

Right in Frank's face.

Career night...

TLover wrote:A backcourt of Graham & Dinwiddie with RJ at the 3 beasting, would not look bad.

Actually Never mind.. lol

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2021/07/31/report-wizards-likely-to-acquire-spencer-dinwiddie-in-sign-and-trade-with-nets/

smackeddog wrote:At this stage, it seems our options are down to Graham, Schroeder, Cam Payne, Reggie Jackson and maybe trading for damaged goods like Kemba Walker, or trading for Sexton. So I agree, of that list you have to give Graham consideration if reasonably cheap.

Jackson please

I’d be fine with Graham. Anything but Elf again

Jimbo5 wrote:Does Graham have a driving game?He is a good 3pt shooter but is he allergic to attacking the paint? I have this impression that just like Lonzo he doesn't drive that much.

You would be correct. https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grahade01.html

                           % of % of % of  % of  % of  % of  FG%  FG%  FG%   FG%   FG%  FG%
Season    Age   G  FG%      2P  0-3 3-10 10-16 16-3P    3P   2P  0-3 3-10 10-16 16-3P   3P
2018-19    23  46 .343    .440 .194 .079  .083  .083  .560 .421 .548 .294  .278  .389 .281
2019-20    24  63 .382    .393 .132 .110  .074  .077  .607 .397 .543 .274  .352  .365 .373
2020-21    25  55 .377    .287 .075 .052  .072  .088  .713 .380 .440 .286  .354  .407 .375
Career        164 .376    .360 .119 .085  .074  .082  .640 .395 .521 .278  .343  .384 .364

martin wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

TLover wrote:How about sign & trade for both Graham & Malik Monk??

I could see us going after Monk- hopefully we're covered if we lose Trey Burkes, or Bullock

Why? Why do you guys either want Monk or think the Knicks would go after him?

The Knicks just drafted IQ, Grimes. We have RJ at the SG spot too.

How does this in any way make sense?

Mainly because Monk could be had cheaply, and showed potential of breaking through last season (could be a fluke, but maybe worth a shot). If we lose Bullock and or Rose/ Burke, we need replacements, wouldn't want to entrust Grimes with that responsibility. RJ can play at the SF for spells too, so never hurts to have guards that can shoot- why not take a chance on him if it's relatively low cost?

martin wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

martin wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

TLover wrote:How about sign & trade for both Graham & Malik Monk??

I could see us going after Monk- hopefully we're covered if we lose Trey Burkes, or Bullock

Why? Why do you guys either want Monk or think the Knicks would go after him?

The Knicks just drafted IQ, Grimes. We have RJ at the SG spot too.

How does this in any way make sense?

Mainly because Monk could be had cheaply, and showed potential of breaking through last season (could be a fluke, but maybe worth a shot). If we lose Bullock and or Rose/ Burke, we need replacements, wouldn't want to entrust Grimes with that responsibility. RJ can play at the SF for spells too, so never hurts to have guards that can shoot- why not take a chance on him if it's relatively low cost?

Because the Knicks just invested draft capital and now will invest coaching and playing time with 2 players that they both believe in and who fit their mold of defensive team oriented players who are professionals. Monk don't fit that.

Just because RJ can maybe slide to the 3 doesn't mean signing Monk to be a low cost 14 or 15th man on bench is a good idea.

YOU maybe don't trust Grimes with the responsibility of playing but it's not what you think on that, it's what you think the coaches think.

IQ was great yet only got what 20mins off the bench, sometimes that got cut right back to 10mins, do you honestly see him giving Grimes more than that? Taking a chance on a player like Monk helps take the pressure off Grimes and gives him time to develop, and if he looks good, you can move Monk at the deadline or offseason for something. We still need to add assets and take a few chances where we can.

Are you honestly saying Thibs and the front office, if they lose Burkes/Rose/ Bullock are going to say "nah, you know we just drafted a guy with the 20 something pick so that will do, no need to sign any replacements"?

martin wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

TLover wrote:How about sign & trade for both Graham & Malik Monk??

I could see us going after Monk- hopefully we're covered if we lose Trey Burkes, or Bullock

Why? Why do you guys either want Monk or think the Knicks would go after him?

The Knicks just drafted IQ, Grimes. We have RJ at the SG spot too.

How does this in any way make sense?

This thread is more about Graham who would be the type of fearless leader we need at PG and is only 26.

Quickly & Monk are not necessarily redundant. Monk is more of a pure shooter and bucket getter.

PG: Graham, Deuce, Luca
SG: Monk, Quickly, Grimes
SF: Barrett, Knox
PF: Randle, Obi
C : Mitch, Taj, Sims

smackeddog wrote:

martin wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

martin wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

TLover wrote:How about sign & trade for both Graham & Malik Monk??

I could see us going after Monk- hopefully we're covered if we lose Trey Burkes, or Bullock

Why? Why do you guys either want Monk or think the Knicks would go after him?

The Knicks just drafted IQ, Grimes. We have RJ at the SG spot too.

How does this in any way make sense?

Mainly because Monk could be had cheaply, and showed potential of breaking through last season (could be a fluke, but maybe worth a shot). If we lose Bullock and or Rose/ Burke, we need replacements, wouldn't want to entrust Grimes with that responsibility. RJ can play at the SF for spells too, so never hurts to have guards that can shoot- why not take a chance on him if it's relatively low cost?

Because the Knicks just invested draft capital and now will invest coaching and playing time with 2 players that they both believe in and who fit their mold of defensive team oriented players who are professionals. Monk don't fit that.

Just because RJ can maybe slide to the 3 doesn't mean signing Monk to be a low cost 14 or 15th man on bench is a good idea.

YOU maybe don't trust Grimes with the responsibility of playing but it's not what you think on that, it's what you think the coaches think.

IQ was great yet only got what 20mins off the bench, sometimes that got cut right back to 10mins, do you honestly see him giving Grimes more than that? Taking a chance on a player like Monk helps take the pressure off Grimes and gives him time to develop, and if he looks good, you can move Monk at the deadline or offseason for something. We still need to add assets and take a few chances where we can.

Are you honestly saying Thibs and the front office, if they lose Burkes/Rose/ Bullock are going to say "nah, you know we just drafted a guy with the 20 something pick so that will do, no need to sign any replacements"?

Yes absolutely in a vacuum. And I see IQ/Grimes splitting that backcourt time leaving zero for a player like Monk.

And I absolutely see the Knicks FO taking a big pass on a player like Monk even if Burks/Rose/Bullock are gone.

Also, I'd go as far as saying that I think Grimes will either match or exceed IQ's playing minutes, injuries aside