TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Sangfroid wrote:This year is about getting our house in order. No sensational trades, no blockbuster FA signings. Just good ol' fashion housework. Finding out who's gonna stick, and who's going. The establishment of that famous "culture" that we clamor for. In the 2 years of Fiz/Miller, NOTHING has been established. Hopefully Thibs, along with our front office have some vision of where/how to take the team, and we see signs of improvement.

I agree. While you always want to keep your ears open, the team really just needs to focus on working the young guys. Thibbs needs to coach them up, and the front office needs to send the message that we believe in you, and if we are going to win, then we are going to win with you. Stop star chasing. The only guys I would look to sign would be J. Grant, Fred VanVleet, or Brandon Ingram, and I would pass on VanVleet if we draft a PG this year. Grant and Ingram are both young and would fill the void at SF with a guy who can defend and hit an open three. If we don't draft a point, then VanVleet is a guy young enough to grow with the team who would be a solid compliment to RJ. Beyond those three guys, we should stand pat.

oh Jerami Grant, I like that. I wonder how much Denver values him, they have a lot of guys signed and with Michael Porter on the roster I wonder what they would offer him.

And what would the Knicks offer a defender who can shoot and play SF and PF in small ball lineup? Seems solid from 3. Thib's new Luol Deng.

Jerami is a guy who I could see the Knicks signing.

I like Grant but is he a high enough volume 3pt shooter for a stretch 4? He's probably fine if we put someone like Joe Harris next to him. But need to keep the 3pt shooting issue in mind. Otherwise he's a great option.

I dont understand your premise, "high enough volume shooter". Why is that the need? The Knicks obviously need shooters, no idea why they need a volume shooter for this type of role or player. Also, this draft is full of decent 3 point shooter for SF/SG, so I'm not looking to solve the problem with 1 signing. Grant's volume is also predicated on the system he is in and the players on his teams; Jerami took most of his shots from 3 point land and at the rim.

Dude is 26 and will be 27 next year, so his prime is right there. Plays multiple positions and spaces the floor with excellent defense. High end roll player IMO.

Agree about him being a younger player with great high end roll player upside. All i'm saying is we are most likely going into the year with Barrett and Robinson as 2 starters, neither of them good 3pt shooters. So adding more players who shoot and make a low rate of threes could be setting them up for failure. We need to bring the best out of our young players to develop them. So if you have a high volume 3pt shooter at PG (FVV or Haliburton for example) and at SF (Gallinari or Harris) than thats fine. But you can't surround Barrett and Mitch with guys who don't shoot and make a lot of threes or their best skills will be minimized. We can't be the worst 3pt shooting team in the league again in terms of makes. But again, i'm assuming this team is going to be built with them in mind, that's only an assumption and definitely not a guarantee.

Any Knicks team that the fan base gets behind is going to be built on defense. You add Grant, then you have above average defenders at the 1 (Frank), 3 (Grant), and 5 (Mitch). Barrett looks like he will at least be a solid defender, so really your only weak point is Randle, who should at least be average under Thibbs. Barrett and Randle are going to take plenty of shots. We need a SF who can space the floor and play defense. Grant is perfect in that role. He does not need to be a high volume shooter, we just need someone who can hit the shots the defense gives us. Knox and Iggy are SF scorers that you hopefully can groom into a role as instant offense off the bench. If the three guys I mentioned, Grant is the most realistic one we could get. Denver likes him, but I don’t think they are going to break the bank for him. If we could sign him to a $15-$16 mil per year deal, it might be enough for Denver to pass but still low enough that we can sign two max players in 2021 (if we trade Randle).

I like it.

Can't possibly go into next year with a lineup of Frank, Barrett, Grant, Randle, and Mitch, that is the poorest shooting lineup in the entire league by a mile. If you move Randle to the bench and add Gallinari or Joe Harris than you are at least moving in the right direction and still maintaining the defensive strength, although i don't see a scenario where Frank starts because we will likely draft a PG or sign one.

At some point, you have to trust the guys you drafted. We will add 2-3 players in the draft and we will likely keep Ellington or Bullock, so will have some shooters. But how are we going to know what we have in Frank, Knox, Iggy, Mitch, and Barrett unless we just run with them. Either they will step up or we get rid of them at the deadline (obviously not Mitch or Barrett). I am against bringing in Gallo to take minutes from Knox and Iggy, and why sign Joe Harris when we have Ellington and Bullock for half the price.

If your plan is to tank this year to see what the young guys can do than that's one thing. But to downgrade from Morris to Grant (who's best position is PF, not SF) and from Payton to Frank, and then call Bullock and/or Ellington our shooters and run it back (plus this year's draft picks), this team will have the same problems as last year only worst. The goal should be to develop the young guys like Barrett and Mitch by finding difference makers that compliment their style. There is a huge difference between Joe Harris and Bullock/Ellington. We have seen that bullock and ellington are not difference makers. The goal should be to add shooters and playmakers who are difference makers to give the young guys a real chance to develop. I am for someone like Grant if he's at PF and if we add a real SF who can shoot and defend. With Frank at the 1, you are relying on Barrett to be the primary playmaker, which is fine, just make sure he has some help.

Knixkik wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Sangfroid wrote:This year is about getting our house in order. No sensational trades, no blockbuster FA signings. Just good ol' fashion housework. Finding out who's gonna stick, and who's going. The establishment of that famous "culture" that we clamor for. In the 2 years of Fiz/Miller, NOTHING has been established. Hopefully Thibs, along with our front office have some vision of where/how to take the team, and we see signs of improvement.

I agree. While you always want to keep your ears open, the team really just needs to focus on working the young guys. Thibbs needs to coach them up, and the front office needs to send the message that we believe in you, and if we are going to win, then we are going to win with you. Stop star chasing. The only guys I would look to sign would be J. Grant, Fred VanVleet, or Brandon Ingram, and I would pass on VanVleet if we draft a PG this year. Grant and Ingram are both young and would fill the void at SF with a guy who can defend and hit an open three. If we don't draft a point, then VanVleet is a guy young enough to grow with the team who would be a solid compliment to RJ. Beyond those three guys, we should stand pat.

oh Jerami Grant, I like that. I wonder how much Denver values him, they have a lot of guys signed and with Michael Porter on the roster I wonder what they would offer him.

And what would the Knicks offer a defender who can shoot and play SF and PF in small ball lineup? Seems solid from 3. Thib's new Luol Deng.

Jerami is a guy who I could see the Knicks signing.

I like Grant but is he a high enough volume 3pt shooter for a stretch 4? He's probably fine if we put someone like Joe Harris next to him. But need to keep the 3pt shooting issue in mind. Otherwise he's a great option.

I dont understand your premise, "high enough volume shooter". Why is that the need? The Knicks obviously need shooters, no idea why they need a volume shooter for this type of role or player. Also, this draft is full of decent 3 point shooter for SF/SG, so I'm not looking to solve the problem with 1 signing. Grant's volume is also predicated on the system he is in and the players on his teams; Jerami took most of his shots from 3 point land and at the rim.

Dude is 26 and will be 27 next year, so his prime is right there. Plays multiple positions and spaces the floor with excellent defense. High end roll player IMO.

Agree about him being a younger player with great high end roll player upside. All i'm saying is we are most likely going into the year with Barrett and Robinson as 2 starters, neither of them good 3pt shooters. So adding more players who shoot and make a low rate of threes could be setting them up for failure. We need to bring the best out of our young players to develop them. So if you have a high volume 3pt shooter at PG (FVV or Haliburton for example) and at SF (Gallinari or Harris) than thats fine. But you can't surround Barrett and Mitch with guys who don't shoot and make a lot of threes or their best skills will be minimized. We can't be the worst 3pt shooting team in the league again in terms of makes. But again, i'm assuming this team is going to be built with them in mind, that's only an assumption and definitely not a guarantee.

Any Knicks team that the fan base gets behind is going to be built on defense. You add Grant, then you have above average defenders at the 1 (Frank), 3 (Grant), and 5 (Mitch). Barrett looks like he will at least be a solid defender, so really your only weak point is Randle, who should at least be average under Thibbs. Barrett and Randle are going to take plenty of shots. We need a SF who can space the floor and play defense. Grant is perfect in that role. He does not need to be a high volume shooter, we just need someone who can hit the shots the defense gives us. Knox and Iggy are SF scorers that you hopefully can groom into a role as instant offense off the bench. If the three guys I mentioned, Grant is the most realistic one we could get. Denver likes him, but I don’t think they are going to break the bank for him. If we could sign him to a $15-$16 mil per year deal, it might be enough for Denver to pass but still low enough that we can sign two max players in 2021 (if we trade Randle).

I like it.

Can't possibly go into next year with a lineup of Frank, Barrett, Grant, Randle, and Mitch, that is the poorest shooting lineup in the entire league by a mile. If you move Randle to the bench and add Gallinari or Joe Harris than you are at least moving in the right direction and still maintaining the defensive strength, although i don't see a scenario where Frank starts because we will likely draft a PG or sign one.

At some point, you have to trust the guys you drafted. We will add 2-3 players in the draft and we will likely keep Ellington or Bullock, so will have some shooters. But how are we going to know what we have in Frank, Knox, Iggy, Mitch, and Barrett unless we just run with them. Either they will step up or we get rid of them at the deadline (obviously not Mitch or Barrett). I am against bringing in Gallo to take minutes from Knox and Iggy, and why sign Joe Harris when we have Ellington and Bullock for half the price.

If your plan is to tank this year to see what the young guys can do than that's one thing. But to downgrade from Morris to Grant (who's best position is PF, not SF) and from Payton to Frank, and then call Bullock and/or Ellington our shooters and run it back (plus this year's draft picks), this team will have the same problems as last year only worst. The goal should be to develop the young guys like Barrett and Mitch by finding difference makers that compliment their style. There is a huge difference between Joe Harris and Bullock/Ellington. We have seen that bullock and ellington are not difference makers. The goal should be to add shooters and playmakers who are difference makers to give the young guys a real chance to develop. I am for someone like Grant if he's at PF and if we add a real SF who can shoot and defend. With Frank at the 1, you are relying on Barrett to be the primary playmaker, which is fine, just make sure he has some help.

Look, I understand why you feel the way you feel. However, in my view, the team went 17-27 under Miller. That would equate to a 31-32 win team if he had them the whole season. That is with last year's roster. If you assume that Barrett, Frank, Mitch, and Knox will improve from better coaching and another summer of work and development, plus you add 3 rookies (most of whom should be shooters) and add someone like Grant, then even bringing back mostly the same team from last year, we should expect a 35-38 win team. That would be solid for the first year of the Thibbs era, and if we use this season to really test Frank, Knox, Mitch, and Barrett, then the front office can make an informed decision on how to help the team moving forward (as far as who to keep and who to trade). So I don't see us standing pat as a "plan to tank." I just think that the current roster is better than it appears at first glance, once you remove Fizdale's negative impact on the record. Yes, we need shooting, but Frank and RJ will need to step up. Plus, Grant shot at a higher 3pt% last year than any of our players, and he has shot over 39% from three for the past two seasons, so he should provide the shooting we need to space the floor, while also bringing defense, which is really how I want this team to win. Frank, Grant, Barrett, and Mitch should be able to create a suffocating defense that by itself should get us to 35 wins.

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Sangfroid wrote:This year is about getting our house in order. No sensational trades, no blockbuster FA signings. Just good ol' fashion housework. Finding out who's gonna stick, and who's going. The establishment of that famous "culture" that we clamor for. In the 2 years of Fiz/Miller, NOTHING has been established. Hopefully Thibs, along with our front office have some vision of where/how to take the team, and we see signs of improvement.

I agree. While you always want to keep your ears open, the team really just needs to focus on working the young guys. Thibbs needs to coach them up, and the front office needs to send the message that we believe in you, and if we are going to win, then we are going to win with you. Stop star chasing. The only guys I would look to sign would be J. Grant, Fred VanVleet, or Brandon Ingram, and I would pass on VanVleet if we draft a PG this year. Grant and Ingram are both young and would fill the void at SF with a guy who can defend and hit an open three. If we don't draft a point, then VanVleet is a guy young enough to grow with the team who would be a solid compliment to RJ. Beyond those three guys, we should stand pat.

oh Jerami Grant, I like that. I wonder how much Denver values him, they have a lot of guys signed and with Michael Porter on the roster I wonder what they would offer him.

And what would the Knicks offer a defender who can shoot and play SF and PF in small ball lineup? Seems solid from 3. Thib's new Luol Deng.

Jerami is a guy who I could see the Knicks signing.

I like Grant but is he a high enough volume 3pt shooter for a stretch 4? He's probably fine if we put someone like Joe Harris next to him. But need to keep the 3pt shooting issue in mind. Otherwise he's a great option.

I dont understand your premise, "high enough volume shooter". Why is that the need? The Knicks obviously need shooters, no idea why they need a volume shooter for this type of role or player. Also, this draft is full of decent 3 point shooter for SF/SG, so I'm not looking to solve the problem with 1 signing. Grant's volume is also predicated on the system he is in and the players on his teams; Jerami took most of his shots from 3 point land and at the rim.

Dude is 26 and will be 27 next year, so his prime is right there. Plays multiple positions and spaces the floor with excellent defense. High end roll player IMO.

Agree about him being a younger player with great high end roll player upside. All i'm saying is we are most likely going into the year with Barrett and Robinson as 2 starters, neither of them good 3pt shooters. So adding more players who shoot and make a low rate of threes could be setting them up for failure. We need to bring the best out of our young players to develop them. So if you have a high volume 3pt shooter at PG (FVV or Haliburton for example) and at SF (Gallinari or Harris) than thats fine. But you can't surround Barrett and Mitch with guys who don't shoot and make a lot of threes or their best skills will be minimized. We can't be the worst 3pt shooting team in the league again in terms of makes. But again, i'm assuming this team is going to be built with them in mind, that's only an assumption and definitely not a guarantee.

Any Knicks team that the fan base gets behind is going to be built on defense. You add Grant, then you have above average defenders at the 1 (Frank), 3 (Grant), and 5 (Mitch). Barrett looks like he will at least be a solid defender, so really your only weak point is Randle, who should at least be average under Thibbs. Barrett and Randle are going to take plenty of shots. We need a SF who can space the floor and play defense. Grant is perfect in that role. He does not need to be a high volume shooter, we just need someone who can hit the shots the defense gives us. Knox and Iggy are SF scorers that you hopefully can groom into a role as instant offense off the bench. If the three guys I mentioned, Grant is the most realistic one we could get. Denver likes him, but I don’t think they are going to break the bank for him. If we could sign him to a $15-$16 mil per year deal, it might be enough for Denver to pass but still low enough that we can sign two max players in 2021 (if we trade Randle).

I like it.

Can't possibly go into next year with a lineup of Frank, Barrett, Grant, Randle, and Mitch, that is the poorest shooting lineup in the entire league by a mile. If you move Randle to the bench and add Gallinari or Joe Harris than you are at least moving in the right direction and still maintaining the defensive strength, although i don't see a scenario where Frank starts because we will likely draft a PG or sign one.

At some point, you have to trust the guys you drafted. We will add 2-3 players in the draft and we will likely keep Ellington or Bullock, so will have some shooters. But how are we going to know what we have in Frank, Knox, Iggy, Mitch, and Barrett unless we just run with them. Either they will step up or we get rid of them at the deadline (obviously not Mitch or Barrett). I am against bringing in Gallo to take minutes from Knox and Iggy, and why sign Joe Harris when we have Ellington and Bullock for half the price.

If your plan is to tank this year to see what the young guys can do than that's one thing. But to downgrade from Morris to Grant (who's best position is PF, not SF) and from Payton to Frank, and then call Bullock and/or Ellington our shooters and run it back (plus this year's draft picks), this team will have the same problems as last year only worst. The goal should be to develop the young guys like Barrett and Mitch by finding difference makers that compliment their style. There is a huge difference between Joe Harris and Bullock/Ellington. We have seen that bullock and ellington are not difference makers. The goal should be to add shooters and playmakers who are difference makers to give the young guys a real chance to develop. I am for someone like Grant if he's at PF and if we add a real SF who can shoot and defend. With Frank at the 1, you are relying on Barrett to be the primary playmaker, which is fine, just make sure he has some help.

Look, I understand why you feel the way you feel. However, in my view, the team went 17-27 under Miller. That would equate to a 31-32 win team if he had them the whole season. That is with last year's roster. If you assume that Barrett, Frank, Mitch, and Knox will improve from better coaching and another summer of work and development, plus you add 3 rookies (most of whom should be shooters) and add someone like Grant, then even bringing back mostly the same team from last year, we should expect a 35-38 win team. That would be solid for the first year of the Thibbs era, and if we use this season to really test Frank, Knox, Mitch, and Barrett, then the front office can make an informed decision on how to help the team moving forward (as far as who to keep and who to trade). So I don't see us standing pat as a "plan to tank." I just think that the current roster is better than it appears at first glance, once you remove Fizdale's negative impact on the record. Yes, we need shooting, but Frank and RJ will need to step up. Plus, Grant shot at a higher 3pt% last year than any of our players, and he has shot over 39% from three for the past two seasons, so he should provide the shooting we need to space the floor, while also bringing defense, which is really how I want this team to win. Frank, Grant, Barrett, and Mitch should be able to create a suffocating defense that by itself should get us to 35 wins.

Agree with this line of thought. If you are going to sign players they have to be of a couple different varieties. 1 year deals, long term player who you can imagine being a starter on a playoff team, or cost effective contracts; anyone on more than a 1 year deal and they need to be part of the long term plan. Love the idea of a healthy 26 year old Gallo but that's not the reality. Like the idea of a high level shooting pro in Joe Harris but he is 29 in a few months and plays the same position as RJ? RJ can maybe play SF but are you diminishing his value? Are there shooters in the draft that can equal Joe's productivity (and maybe be a better defender) at a much lower cost point?