I like Brogdan but I'm not including the 11th pick!

I say this as a Brogdon fan but also cognizant of his injury issues.

Knixkik wrote:I don’t want to touch the kyrie rumor. Feels like a leverage play. As far as Brogdon, Shams mentioned Knicks like him with 11 as their top trade piece. If they can move up for Ivey than I can see that. If a player they love (maybe Daniels or Griffin) drops, they should select that player at 11. If they don’t love a prospect at 11 I can see them moving Fournier and 11 for Brogdon. That clears the SG opening for Grimes (or Reddish or IQ) and if the backcourt is grimes and Brogdon it will bring back the defensive identity Thibs prefers. They have to continue to develop Barrett, Quickley, Reddish, and Grimes and need minutes for them all. A prospect they don’t love at 11 has no path for minutes in the near future. This sort of clears the way for the guys they have now and gives them a real PG upgrade. 11 is a slight overpay on the surface for an oft-injured 29 year old guard, but clearly Fournier sort of compensates for that. If they move Burks and resign mitch you can sort of see a Brogdon, Grimes, Barrett, Randle and Mitch lineup with Rose, IQ, Reddish, Toppin and Sims as the five off the bench giving a good mix of win-now and youth prioritization. Again no one likes to deal lottery picks for injured vets, but we are talking about a situation where there isn’t an obvious prospect at 11, or a rotation spot for that player.

IMHO there is no way the Knicks do a straight up 11 and Fournier for Brogdon. Fournier got 2 years left and Brogdon has 3. I don't even think this trade makes sense from Indiana standpoint with Duarte and Buddy Hield on roster but maybe I'm wrong on that. In fact, if I'm the Knicks, I'd only do this for #11/Fournier for #6/Brogdon and then only if I could repurpose #6 to #4 for Ivey.

Chandler wrote:11 is too much for Brogdon.

I say this as a Brogdon fan but also cognizant of his injury issues.

It’s really about offloading unwanted salary and clearing space for young guys too. Knicks need 2 things : a PG and to balance out the roster. Otherwise no minutes for reddish next year and grimes and IQ are in the same limited roles.

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Jees that’s way to high Cost only 26 for woods

Wood has never impacted winning and he’s a big man. Not comparable whatsoever.

Exactly.

Briggs, you have to get past what you think Woods upside is versus what he isn't in reality. Woods is a siv on defense, he flat just doesn't care but that doesn't bother Mavs so much cause they want to outscore you for the most part.

This is now the second franchise in a row that has sold low on Woods for various reasons, got to infer a lot from that and then do the eye test.

smackeddog wrote:Us ending up with Kyrie would be the ultimate end point for Knicks fan- it would be like the end boss culmination of the past 20 years- awful!😂

Add to eventual age talent degradation process with injury and you got Marbury 2.0. Only reason it ever gets discussed is his vast talent.

Brogdon needs to be Laker. Next to beal is a good idea, as is on Brooklyn or Philly. Two year window and you hope he can make a playoff run.

smackeddog wrote:I think bleacher reports J Fischer (who definitely has a Knicks source as he predicted all our FA moves last offseason in detail) said on a podcast that not all rumours are true and for example said one rumour for a team being interested in a player he checked out with his source on the team who said there was no truth in it. For some reason I got the impression it was the Knicks/Brogdon rumor.

Brogdon-Hield is a negative value contract due to his extensive injury history (only played just over 60% of his games the last few seasons and injury concerns were the reason he slipped in the draft AND why the Bucks let him go to the Pacers. Furthermore, that indy beat writer, Caitlin Cooper(?) said he's not really a PG, he's more of a 2 guard who can do some handling of the ball. Also he's not great at driving and scoring at this pint and isn't a great defender at this point. Think Knick fans that want him seem to see him as a PG- he's not really anymore. So do you really want an injury prone, undersized SG who doesn't fit the system and isn't a good defender, on a bad contract as your starting PG AND give up an a first rounder for the privilege? You may as well stick with Burke for another year!

Brogdon is 6’5 230. Definitely not undersized for a SG. And if he’s more of a SG that can just do some ball handling, like a better version of Burks, that’s fine. I would start IQ alongside him and let them share playmaking duties and see how IQ does in a lead guard role alongside a guy who can handle some of the playmaking reps.

However, this seems like a situation in which the Pacers are rebuilding. They have to contend with Brogdon's salary. Which I feel is what their main goal. If they are in need of dumping his salary, I would offer some salary dumps like Kemba, maybe Rose and a couple of seconds. They would be able to release Kemba and maybe flip Rose for some more young assets. (Is Noah tradeable? lol) Do not think they would want EF as he does not help their CAP. Unless they feel they need shooting to compete. BUT NO WAY the Knicks are giving up an 11th in order to help out the Pacers. Think they are saving that for some bigger fish.

That would be the limit that I am interested in another injured PG. He comes with a pick swap up a few spots and they take Randle (who might beast on that team…)

Knicks trade: Randle and Pick #11
Knicks get: Brogdon and #6

Brogdon has not played enough games to justify a 1st round draft pick, let alone a lottery draft pick. He’s a legitimate injury concern for the remainder of his current contract. Randle and #11 would be a legit overpay for Brogdon and #6 based on talent/health except Randle clearly needs to get the heck out of NY.