Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

Why are we trading Randle?? The man is the closes thing to a star that we have. This is why we will never get to the finals because we don't know what the hell we are doing.

Who is trading Randle? The Knicks FO or a bunch of posters on this board?

jskinny35 wrote:Building around Randle just because we don't have anyone better is short-sighted IMO. He can be a piece but if he's your best player - you're not going too far. Yes everyone is entitled to have an off night (ex RJ played very poorly) but good teams will always be able to shut us down if Randle is "the guy" we go to when the game gets tight. If we had knock down shooters it would clearly help. Randle's good/very good - but the defense knows what to take away and he doesn't possess elite anything (speed, athleticism, shooting, vision) that can overcome a good defensive set. He's a solid B+ that seems like an A because we haven't had any A's in a long time. Melo was maybe an A- at his best. Even early Melo had some of those needed qualities that could win close games from his talent. I think Randle would be amazing on a playoff team needing a workhorse off the bench or a 3rd quality guy. The sooner we realize this and take advantage of selling high - maybe we can gain some players and/or picks that can help us find "the guy." I'm holding out hope that RJ will keep developing, but without a significant improvement in shooting - he looks more likely a 2nd or 3rd guy as well.

I'm always on board with the concept of when trading - selling high. However roster composition and timing of trades have to make sense and should be done to construct and build on the foundation of a current roster. For instance, if you eliminate Randle, who is stepping in on the current roster that would be his equal in terms of production? In your trade, you may be plugging a hole elsewhere, only to open up one at the 4.

IMO, the objective is to build on what you have until you are in a better position to make the move for a Big Fish "A" type player. That said, you need to either develop of acquire an acceptable alternative to Randle prior to considering trading him. Example would be if Obi steps up over time then having both would be allow Knicks to trade Randle to upgrade a different position.

Examples of what the Knicks can do immediately to generate potential upgrades.......

With the addition of Rose, there is now significant redundancy at PG. Trading one or two of Payton, Rivers or Frank. While this won't bring back an "A" guy, it can be used to upgrade or bring in more draft assets while not negatively effecting the roster.

Bullock / Burks / Knox - one these guys can be traded without a negative impact and to build assets.

IMO the trick to building is to continue upgrading to get quality "B" guys with redundancy at most positions prior to making the move for a big fish "A" player.

jskinny35 wrote:foosballnick - agree with a lot of what you said.

For instance, if you eliminate Randle, who is stepping in on the current roster that would be his equal in terms of production? In your trade, you may be plugging a hole elsewhere, only to open up one at the 4.

At the moment no one is unless Randle is traded for another player of similar production at the 4. My take is to use his value to acquire similar production at a different position which would open up more spacing and ball movement. I believe this would significantly help RJ and Mitch (to lesser extent) with spacing and offensive flow. I had suggested an example of a deal involving Lavine and Lauri where Randle's production would be replaced by Lavine, while also acquiring an outside shooting/stretch 4 in Lauri. I think RJ and Lavine could be interchangeable wings with a solid outside shooting big man. It doesn't fix the hole at PG but I do believe it would help some of the other players who are struggling due to spacing and lack of team outside shooting. It's not perfect as Lauri doesn't rebound like Randle - but there are no perfect players that do everything (that want to play for the Knicks). We could also see more minutes for Obi to see what we actually have (or don't).

That said, you need to either develop of acquire an acceptable alternative to Randle prior to considering trading him.

Part of me is fine with playing Randle and waiting for the right deal later on. Another part of me is concerned he will come back down to earth with his production and we won't have the value. My only concern is we put all are eggs in the Randle basket and resign him - to only realize later he isn't the 1A piece. Then he has lesser trade value because we're paying him like he's a 1A guy when he is a 1B or 1C guy on better teams.

Examples of what the Knicks can do immediately to generate potential upgrades.......

Trading one or two of Payton, Rivers or Frank. While this won't bring back an "A" guy, it can be used to upgrade or bring in more draft assets while not negatively effecting the roster.

I agree 100% - if Payton, Rivers or Frank can net us more assets we should definitely look to move on as they are redundant. I'd prioritize keeping Frank out of the 3 simply because we've seen what Payton and Rivers can do in Thibs system and a part of me wants to see if Frank can progress any bit more. And I want to see him play Luka one more time :)

Bullock / Burks / Knox - one these guys can be traded without a negative impact and to build assets.

Same thing - agree 100%. I'd shop Knox and Burks first. Bullock to me is available but worth more as he's cheap and would eventually move to be a solid bench player as our team improves.

IMO the trick to building is to continue upgrading to get quality "B" guys with redundancy at most positions prior to making the move for a big fish "A" player.

Kinda like Denver did - I get it and it's hard to argue against that plan. Only concern for me would be if Randle isn't able to sustain his current level of play. I guess we'll see!

Yes - similar to the Denver model would probably be the most applicable build path. Of course this could be altered if we hit Cade the draft lottery!

Regarding a trade for Levine/Markkanen - I understand why the Knicks might do it, but why would the Bulls make the trade and what would they ask for in return? My guess is that they would want something big in return for their 2 best players.

The already available player – and much less costly one – is Oladipo, the new Rockets star whom Houston obtained in the James Harden blockbuster. Sources contend they are amenable to trading Oladipo, since he’ll be an unrestricted free agent this summer.

If the Knicks seized Oladipo, it will show Knicks GM Scott Perry still has lots of power in the organization. Perry drafted the University of Indiana product in Orlando with the No. 2 pick in the 2013 draft

smackeddog wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:Vic has had one monster game in Houston. The rest have alternated between meh and complete dumpster 🔥. Knicks need to stick a pin in this, take it to shooting range and blast this idea out of existence.
https://nypost.com/2021/02/10/knicks-monitoring-bradley-beal-victor-oladipo/amp/

The already available player – and much less costly one – is Oladipo, the new Rockets star whom Houston obtained in the James Harden blockbuster. Sources contend they are amenable to trading Oladipo, since he’ll be an unrestricted free agent this summer.

If the Knicks seized Oladipo, it will show Knicks GM Scott Perry still has lots of power in the organization. Perry drafted the University of Indiana product in Orlando with the No. 2 pick in the 2013 draft

.

Vic would be like last years Randle, I do hope we don’t sign him

It's not a coincidence that he looked like a solid, starting NBA two-guard in Indiana, but looks like complete trash when given higher useage and more responsibility in Houston.

I like both players, Beal is an elite offensive player/shooter. I havent seen much Wirard games so i have no idea about his defense. Oladipo is more of a better all around player/two-way player. His offense is a couple of steps behind Beal but is still a big upgrade from our current starting SG.

Beal will move the needle further towards being contenders than Oladipo but i feel the price for getting Beal is far greater than the price for Oladipo. I am concerned with oladipo's health but 5 years ago or so people had the same concerns with Beal's health. I think Oladipo can still shake off the injury bug just like Beal did.

If the price for Beal is Frank, Knox, Payton, Rivers and 2 first rounders. I can live with that. But if the price is more than that maybe we can get Oladipo for Frank, knox, Rivers and 1 first rounder. We can still flip payton for a future asset in a separate trade.

Starters:

Mitch, Randle, RJ, (Beal or Oladipo), (Rose or Quickley)

Bench:

Noel, Obi, Bullock, Burks, (Rose or Quickley)

By the time the playoff starts this group could jell already and can be a headache for other teams during the playoffs. Then pray the front office can just continue to draft good players to fortify the bench. This in my mind is one path the knicks can take towards being contenders for years