Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/SBondyNYDN/status/1539007567640375297

These are the 2 trades I’d try to build around to reset the franchise. I am building around defense, rebounding, ball movers, and 2 elite fast guys who get up and down court. I just think Ivey’s speed as a breakdown guy and up and down court is what you need as a deep playoff team. These trades resets the salary cap and allow you to lose for 1 more season to capture another high 2023 pick.

The guys I want to keep on team: IQ, Obi, Grimes, McBride. Asset I’d hesitate to give up (or I’d heavily protect): Knicks 2023. Everything else is up for grabs if I can get both players. After another year, they would only have Fournier on the books for $20M and that’s it (and maybe Mtich). Clean cap.

Trade #1: RJ + other for #4 if Ivey still on board. From the Knicks perspective, you have to literally wait until the last hour to even get to the point of either offering or more like acquiescing to including RJ in a trade. I don’t really understand RJ’s value to teams (and I obviously have great pessimism about his ceiling) but this is the red line moment for the Knicks if this trade can go down. Do you risk RJ for Ivey? And quite frankly, is it enough? I have no idea but it gets a pillar type player for Sac; they can start RJ, Fox and rotate Davion Mitchell with both. I’d be inclined to include Cam for a lineup for Sac that looks like: Fox, RJ, Cam, Harrison, Sabonis. Knicks got a boatload of other picks, players they could include.

Trade #2: Randle, #11 + other for #7 and Belsoe. If they can withhold the #11 pick from RJ trade, I’m all in on trying to see if Portland would move down 4 slots for Randle to draft Dyson Daniels. I have zero clue if this is an overpay or not (or enough or worthwhile for POR) but those are the primaries: Randle, #11 for #7 and Belsoe. Randle and Jusuf Nurkić is a poor fit but that’s all I got (feel like POR really likes Nurkic but IDK). Is moving 4 slots down in draft worth a player like Randle if you are trying to compete in the short term with Dame? Portland still would have their $20.9M trade exception to lure/get another player. Could it be a 3 team trade that also involves Detroit so that Jerami Grant goes to Portland and Pistons get #11 and other? Detroit would get the #11 to go along with the #5, give up Grant and perhaps get back more picks or players (starting with their 2023 second round pick which the Knicks own). DET could have Cade, Sharpe, Bey, PF, Duren to build around? POR can kinda sorta compete with Dame, Simons, Grant, Randle, Nurkic?

Knicks would have a ton of fast, perimeter guys who move ball and move feet. IQ, Ivey, Daniels, McBride, Grimes. I’m not drafting Ivey or Daniels as a PG in the short term. I’d want Ivey to just score and go nuts as a SG for a couple of years. I’m running with IQ, Ivey, SF, Obi, Mitch. Guards who can rebound and push and bigs who can run with them. I’m letting IQ/Obi finish what they started at end of last season and letting Ivey and Daniels marinate with the likes of Rose from a PG perspective. Off the bench in the guard spots: Rose, McBride, Grimes, Daniels. In 2 years: Ivey, IQ, Daniels, Obi start. You have 3 guys 1-3 who can be your lead guard at any time and they all push and move the ball for Obi.

I don’t buy into the Thibs won’t play rookies nonsense; he’ll love coaching guys who listen and give 100% effort and would have a blast with guys like Ivey and Daniels.

Feels like the Knicks are on their way to pursuing Ivey, no idea on what it’ll take or what they are willing to give up and if it’ll happen but I’d love it.

Also, yada yada yada, Ivey is rep'ed by CAA and his agent is nephew of Leon, so there is that.

Caveat #2: I think Atlanta is all in on either Gobert or Ayton. Lots of if's here but if they need to include Bogi or Kevin Huerter in that type of trade, I say they go in and trade Gallo for Fournier (especially if Gobert headed to Hawks) cause Gallo is old and expiring and they will have little maneuverability after and need another spacer.

Caveat #3: If Randle/RJ off cap AND Fournier can be moved, Brunson suddenly becomes attainable. I think. I didn't do that math but it feels almost right.

Thought this was a good summary of the Knicks-Ivey situation

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnickFilmSkool/status/1538871950986076160

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I don’t like a backcourt built around guys who can’t really shoot. I think either on their own is nice. Ivey alongside Barrett would be what we need. Barrett playing in the open floor with a guy like Ivey will unlock his game and make him a more efficient player. That is what we need. Daniels is a glue guy but Ivey with Barrett would be very dynamic.

Why you building around RJ then? He just showed us for 3 straight years that he can't really shoot.

Barrett shot 40% from 3pt without much spacing around him. High volume too. He’s proven he can shoot. You’re plan involves way too many unknowns for my taste. I know you’re down on Barrett somewhat over the years. He’s still not a guaranteed star. But if you move him it would need to be for a sure thing. But you can never say a guy who shoots 40% from 3 in a clunky lineup can’t shoot.

For me, you are trading for a guy in Ivey that will have an elite skill: his speed. I don't think RJ has an elite skill that he can fall back on when his shot is not falling or even one that he can use to separate himself. Ivey does AND pretty soon you need to make the Max decision on RJ.

RJ is just not good as a finisher at rim, below average FT shooter, sucks at the midrange. Even if he makes those MUCH better, that will still fall into the average range.

To put the 40% shooting into perspective, he has had about 4 good months of downtown shooting from over ~13 months worth of games across last 2 years; I don't think that makes him a proven shoot, IMO that's a shooter who got hot for a few months. And I don't think it's a spacing thing, a lot of those 3's are wide open.

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I don’t like a backcourt built around guys who can’t really shoot. I think either on their own is nice. Ivey alongside Barrett would be what we need. Barrett playing in the open floor with a guy like Ivey will unlock his game and make him a more efficient player. That is what we need. Daniels is a glue guy but Ivey with Barrett would be very dynamic.

Why you building around RJ then? He just showed us for 3 straight years that he can't really shoot.

Barrett shot 40% from 3pt without much spacing around him. High volume too. He’s proven he can shoot. You’re plan involves way too many unknowns for my taste. I know you’re down on Barrett somewhat over the years. He’s still not a guaranteed star. But if you move him it would need to be for a sure thing. But you can never say a guy who shoots 40% from 3 in a clunky lineup can’t shoot.

For me, you are trading for a guy in Ivey that will have an elite skill: his speed. I don't think RJ has an elite skill that he can fall back on when his shot is not falling or even one that he can use to separate himself. Ivey does AND pretty soon you need to make the Max decision on RJ.

RJ is just not good as a finisher at rim, below average FT shooter, sucks at the midrange. Even if he makes those MUCH better, that will still fall into the average range.

To put the 40% shooting into perspective, he has had about 4 good months of downtown shooting from over ~13 months worth of games across last 2 years; I don't think that makes him a proven shoot, IMO that's a shooter who got hot for a few months. And I don't think it's a spacing thing, a lot of those 3's are wide open.

The one thing RJ does occasionally do nicely is get to the rim and get easy baskets. I think he might have been better when he was playing as a SG and could use his size more.

But- if I can trade him straight up for pick 4 in this draft and get Ivey, there is a lot of reasons to make that move.

He is a downhill guy that does get to the rim but for as much as he does, he misses a lot of easy ones, and I worry about that.

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I don’t like a backcourt built around guys who can’t really shoot. I think either on their own is nice. Ivey alongside Barrett would be what we need. Barrett playing in the open floor with a guy like Ivey will unlock his game and make him a more efficient player. That is what we need. Daniels is a glue guy but Ivey with Barrett would be very dynamic.

Why you building around RJ then? He just showed us for 3 straight years that he can't really shoot.

Barrett shot 40% from 3pt without much spacing around him. High volume too. He’s proven he can shoot. You’re plan involves way too many unknowns for my taste. I know you’re down on Barrett somewhat over the years. He’s still not a guaranteed star. But if you move him it would need to be for a sure thing. But you can never say a guy who shoots 40% from 3 in a clunky lineup can’t shoot.

For me, you are trading for a guy in Ivey that will have an elite skill: his speed. I don't think RJ has an elite skill that he can fall back on when his shot is not falling or even one that he can use to separate himself. Ivey does AND pretty soon you need to make the Max decision on RJ.

RJ is just not good as a finisher at rim, below average FT shooter, sucks at the midrange. Even if he makes those MUCH better, that will still fall into the average range.

To put the 40% shooting into perspective, he has had about 4 good months of downtown shooting from over ~13 months worth of games across last 2 years; I don't think that makes him a proven shoot, IMO that's a shooter who got hot for a few months. And I don't think it's a spacing thing, a lot of those 3's are wide open.

Don't think that Randle trade has a chance - but sure wish it did. Not sure about RJ's ceiling but pairing him with an elite athletic SG could open things up for him and our team. Randle playing always slowed the pace down (except for 1/2 of the Lakers game when he looked great) and if we are set to build with IQ, Toppin - really think Ivey could boost RJ's production. Only caveat I have it how is Ivey's outside shot? I'm biased toward RJ but would move him for the right guy but is Ivey really a sure thing?

I would move RJ for Lavine or an established player but RJ's floor is a still a starter/guy you can win with (just not the star). How about you send Randle elsewhere and make the trade RJ to Portland for Anfernee Simons instead? He's up and coming but not yet a star - he seems like he has it and is somewhat proven. Randle to LA in salary dump which allows us to move up in draft, consolidate and reset by moving older expensive vets.

NY - Anfernee Simons, Bledsoe, Winslow, R. Westbrook, S. Johnson, #7 (Port)

LA - Julius Randle, D. Rose, Burks
(Westbrook off books and LA receives Randle, Rose quality backup PG, Burks solid bench scoring)

Portland - RJ Barrett, N. Noel, K. Walker, #11 pick (NY)
(RJ more complementary as a slasher whereas Simons is smaller w/Lillard, salary dump to NY (Winslow, Bledsoe), still keep a lottery pick)

NY Roster
Immanuel Quickley (McBride)
Anfernee Simons (Fournier)
Quentin Grimes (Cam Reddish, #7 wing pick - J.Davis/Mathurin/D.Daniels)
Obi Toppin (Taj)
Mitch Robinson (Sims)

Sit/Waive/Emergency - Westbrook, S. Johnson, Winslow, Bledsoe

RJ needs to be in the Julius spot where he is creating and has shooters around him.

He will work himself into a star.

At least one need not worry about Kyrie here!

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I don’t like a backcourt built around guys who can’t really shoot. I think either on their own is nice. Ivey alongside Barrett would be what we need. Barrett playing in the open floor with a guy like Ivey will unlock his game and make him a more efficient player. That is what we need. Daniels is a glue guy but Ivey with Barrett would be very dynamic.

Why you building around RJ then? He just showed us for 3 straight years that he can't really shoot.

Barrett shot 40% from 3pt without much spacing around him. High volume too. He’s proven he can shoot. You’re plan involves way too many unknowns for my taste. I know you’re down on Barrett somewhat over the years. He’s still not a guaranteed star. But if you move him it would need to be for a sure thing. But you can never say a guy who shoots 40% from 3 in a clunky lineup can’t shoot.

For me, you are trading for a guy in Ivey that will have an elite skill: his speed. I don't think RJ has an elite skill that he can fall back on when his shot is not falling or even one that he can use to separate himself. Ivey does AND pretty soon you need to make the Max decision on RJ.

RJ is just not good as a finisher at rim, below average FT shooter, sucks at the midrange. Even if he makes those MUCH better, that will still fall into the average range.

To put the 40% shooting into perspective, he has had about 4 good months of downtown shooting from over ~13 months worth of games across last 2 years; I don't think that makes him a proven shoot, IMO that's a shooter who got hot for a few months. And I don't think it's a spacing thing, a lot of those 3's are wide open.

So your thought is to continue with the trend of blowing it up every 2-3 years? This time bringing in fast/athletic guys who aren't particularly accurate shooters in an NBA that is ever more focused on the 3 ball? Last year - Daniels shot 25% from 3, Ivey shot 36% (same as RJ's average from the longer NBA 3).

You also watch every game RJ plays and appear to focus on his flaws. Do you do the same for guys like Ivey? For instance, what do you know about his effort on D or how consistent his shooting is from game to game? The Purdue offense was built around a strong low post game - pounding low to Edey (7'4") and Williams (American his junior year). Defenses were often forced to collapse - allowing the guards/wings to roam free beyond the arc for kick-out open looks or dribble penetration or taking pre-occupying the other team's shot blocker. Ivey with a 29% usage rate averaged only 3 assists and close to 3 turnovers. By comparison Randle averaged almost the exact same usage for the Knicks last year with 5+ assists and 3+ turnovers - and people here want to run him out of town because he's a ball-stopper and flipped the bird. RJ averaged a notch below at 27+ usage with 3 assists and 2.2 TO - and I think you've claimed his passing ability to be sh!T.

I don't mind Ivey on the Knicks (with RJ) and as I've stated, he can be a beast of a shooting guard/wing if he continues to progress his outside shot. However giving up significant assets or emptying the roster to acquire him does not seem prudent to me.

foosballnick wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:I don’t like a backcourt built around guys who can’t really shoot. I think either on their own is nice. Ivey alongside Barrett would be what we need. Barrett playing in the open floor with a guy like Ivey will unlock his game and make him a more efficient player. That is what we need. Daniels is a glue guy but Ivey with Barrett would be very dynamic.

Why you building around RJ then? He just showed us for 3 straight years that he can't really shoot.

Barrett shot 40% from 3pt without much spacing around him. High volume too. He’s proven he can shoot. You’re plan involves way too many unknowns for my taste. I know you’re down on Barrett somewhat over the years. He’s still not a guaranteed star. But if you move him it would need to be for a sure thing. But you can never say a guy who shoots 40% from 3 in a clunky lineup can’t shoot.

For me, you are trading for a guy in Ivey that will have an elite skill: his speed. I don't think RJ has an elite skill that he can fall back on when his shot is not falling or even one that he can use to separate himself. Ivey does AND pretty soon you need to make the Max decision on RJ.

RJ is just not good as a finisher at rim, below average FT shooter, sucks at the midrange. Even if he makes those MUCH better, that will still fall into the average range.

To put the 40% shooting into perspective, he has had about 4 good months of downtown shooting from over ~13 months worth of games across last 2 years; I don't think that makes him a proven shoot, IMO that's a shooter who got hot for a few months. And I don't think it's a spacing thing, a lot of those 3's are wide open.

So your thought is to continue with the trend of blowing it up every 2-3 years? This time bringing in fast/athletic guys who aren't particularly accurate shooters in an NBA that is ever more focused on the 3 ball? Last year - Daniels shot 25% from 3, Ivey shot 36% (same as RJ's average from the longer NBA 3).

You also watch every game RJ plays and appear to focus on his flaws. Do you do the same for guys like Ivey? For instance, what do you know about his effort on D or how consistent his shooting is from game to game? The Purdue offense was built around a strong low post game - pounding low to Edey (7'4") and Williams (American his junior year). Defenses were often forced to collapse - allowing the guards/wings to roam free beyond the arc for kick-out open looks or dribble penetration or taking pre-occupying the other team's shot blocker. Ivey with a 29% usage rate averaged only 3 assists and close to 3 turnovers. By comparison Randle averaged almost the exact same usage for the Knicks last year with 5+ assists and 3+ turnovers - and people here want to run him out of town because he's a ball-stopper and flipped the bird. RJ averaged a notch below at 27+ usage with 3 assists and 2.2 TO - and I think you've claimed his passing ability to be sh!T.

I don't mind Ivey on the Knicks (with RJ) and as I've stated, he can be a beast of a shooting guard/wing if he continues to progress his outside shot. However giving up significant assets or emptying the roster to acquire him does not seem prudent to me.

You could use that same logic in a poker game. "So, your logic is to fold hands that you don't think can win?". Yes. My logic is not to "blow it up" but I am comfortable moving on from players that don't seem to be working out.

Your arguments against Ivey are more detailed than mine. I am not pro-Ivey, but I am pro-"Something has got to change".

I might be taking Barrett and Randle at their worst, but I don't think either is the lead player on a championship team and I don't think they can even defer to each other let alone another star player.