BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:One year,$18M deal. Let him prove last year is an aberration.

What's the reasoning behind $18M? 2 years ago the Knicks made a 2 year commitment to Randle in that range and he seemed to have better production and value up until that point in his career.

What is the benchmark for both wanting to sign Oubre for $18M versus using the cap space on better alternatives?

For the record, I'm not particularly crazy about this. But if the FO is, then $18M might be the number that keeps GSW at arms length and reels Kelly in. I think Fornier should be a higher priority.

Without really paying attention to GS, I think the thing that will keep Oubre away from GS is the repeater luxury tax and Thompson's return.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:One year,$18M deal. Let him prove last year is an aberration.

What's the reasoning behind $18M? 2 years ago the Knicks made a 2 year commitment to Randle in that range and he seemed to have better production and value up until that point in his career.

What is the benchmark for both wanting to sign Oubre for $18M versus using the cap space on better alternatives?

For the record, I'm not particularly crazy about this. But if the FO is, then $18M might be the number that keeps GSW at arms length and reels Kelly in. I think Fornier should be a higher priority.

Without really paying attention to GS, I think the thing that will keep Oubre away from GS is the repeater luxury tax and Thompson's return.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:One year,$18M deal. Let him prove last year is an aberration.

What's the reasoning behind $18M? 2 years ago the Knicks made a 2 year commitment to Randle in that range and he seemed to have better production and value up until that point in his career.

What is the benchmark for both wanting to sign Oubre for $18M versus using the cap space on better alternatives?

For the record, I'm not particularly crazy about this. But if the FO is, then $18M might be the number that keeps GSW at arms length and reels Kelly in. I think Fornier should be a higher priority.

Without really paying attention to GS, I think the thing that will keep Oubre away from GS is the repeater luxury tax and Thompson's return.

Maybe. But the rumors are that they want him back. How much of that is lip service? Who knows? I think they'd probably be better served with someone like Otto Porter, who's been flying under the radar this FA.

Now there was a lot going on with the luxury tax last year that changed it from other years cause of the pandemic. But take this in and tell me you see GSW doing this again without REALLY considering other options.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/BobbyMarks42/status/1329545240248807424

It seems like they are screwed. But, again, who knows? Maybe they try to find a sucker with cap space, and I'm not referring to is, to offload Wiggins. If tax savings are they're aim, it seems like saying goodbye to Oubre is just the start. Maybe the Knicks can bring Oubre in at $15M? Again, I'd rather look at other players. Just responding to the rumors of "mutual interest."

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:One year,$18M deal. Let him prove last year is an aberration.

What's the reasoning behind $18M? 2 years ago the Knicks made a 2 year commitment to Randle in that range and he seemed to have better production and value up until that point in his career.

What is the benchmark for both wanting to sign Oubre for $18M versus using the cap space on better alternatives?

For the record, I'm not particularly crazy about this. But if the FO is, then $18M might be the number that keeps GSW at arms length and reels Kelly in. I think Fornier should be a higher priority.

Without really paying attention to GS, I think the thing that will keep Oubre away from GS is the repeater luxury tax and Thompson's return.

Maybe. But the rumors are tIf hat they want him back. How much of that is lip service? Who knows? I think they'd probably be better served with someone like Otto Porter, who's been flying under the radar this FA.

At one time Porter Jr. was the ultimate 3 and D wing but after another injury to his back he may be finished. He would be a huge risk to sign for anything longer than a year.

TripleThreat wrote:

TPercy wrote:What exactly is Oubre good at? I had this question before he was drafted and I’m still having this question now.

Very athletic, length, very switchable. Legitimate NBA wing. Can, when he's motivated, move well off the ball. Don't think he'll project into a plus range above average long range gunner, but he'll be passable in that area. Not easy to find that kind of baseline in one player, esp young.

He's not disciplined, but that was much better with the Warriors over time. Streaky and not great at shot selection. He's a momentum player. He starts hot and things roll well, he starts badly and it gets into his head and it snowballs.

He's useful depending on what he costs. The larger issue is he needs a steady veteran roster around him. Guys like this need other players to keep them in line and keep their focus on the game.

I agree with this analysis. I might be overly optimistic on Oubre, but I feel like the technology invested in by the Knicks was helpful to Barrett and Randle. That taking a guy with the right physical attributes and adding it to guys like Randle and Barrett and their work ethic might benefit him. It’s more what’s in his head that makes me wonder if he can be successful here.

I wonder if adding Dinwiddie and Oubre would be too poor of shooting versus the athleticism and length they bring to our two weakest positions. Could see both of them being all league defenders in the right system.

Also wonder if Mitch Robinson can become Myles Turner or if we should make a trade for Turner.

Dinwiddie
Barrett
Oubre
Randle
Turner isn’t a bad starting 5. It just doesn’t have any superstars.

blkexec wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:One year,$18M deal. Let him prove last year is an aberration.

What's the reasoning behind $18M? 2 years ago the Knicks made a 2 year commitment to Randle in that range and he seemed to have better production and value up until that point in his career.

What is the benchmark for both wanting to sign Oubre for $18M versus using the cap space on better alternatives?

Are there realistic better alternatives for wing players this off season? The one year deal allows us the flexibility to either resign him if he as a breakout season or let him walk and go after a better fit next off season. The guy I want is LaVine and if he decides to leave Chicago I think we would have a legit shot at signing him. I would be nervous about missing out on that opportunity because we're locked into Oubre for multiple years. I also think I read or hear somewhere Oubre wants around $20M?

On a 1 year deal and depending on how much you want to spend? Burks/Bullock? DeRozan, Otto Porter, Fournier, Snell.

There are enough options.

I don't know. Bullock, Burks Porter and Snell are certainly Dollar Tree shopping free agents who you can probably get on the cheap and they may be better value options. Fournier and Oubre will probably command around the same money and if so I'd rather go with Oubre's overall potential upside over Fournier's shooting. DeRozan? Hard for me to be objective. Just never been a fan of his game.

I rather have snell than oubre. Snell was a top 3pt % shooter....and long enough to play defense on similar players that oubre would guard. But snell shoots better and will be cheaper. Burks, Fournier....we have a lot of 1yr or short term deals these guys will take, once the market drys up especially. Similar approach to last year while still improving the team. Oubre just seems a little high for what he brings, in my opinion. But I've been wrong b4.

Snell can't really create and his shot selection is almost Frank like. Snell is a last resort IMHO.

blkexec wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:One year,$18M deal. Let him prove last year is an aberration.

What's the reasoning behind $18M? 2 years ago the Knicks made a 2 year commitment to Randle in that range and he seemed to have better production and value up until that point in his career.

What is the benchmark for both wanting to sign Oubre for $18M versus using the cap space on better alternatives?

Are there realistic better alternatives for wing players this off season? The one year deal allows us the flexibility to either resign him if he as a breakout season or let him walk and go after a better fit next off season. The guy I want is LaVine and if he decides to leave Chicago I think we would have a legit shot at signing him. I would be nervous about missing out on that opportunity because we're locked into Oubre for multiple years. I also think I read or hear somewhere Oubre wants around $20M?

On a 1 year deal and depending on how much you want to spend? Burks/Bullock? DeRozan, Otto Porter, Fournier, Snell.

There are enough options.

I don't know. Bullock, Burks Porter and Snell are certainly Dollar Tree shopping free agents who you can probably get on the cheap and they may be better value options. Fournier and Oubre will probably command around the same money and if so I'd rather go with Oubre's overall potential upside over Fournier's shooting. DeRozan? Hard for me to be objective. Just never been a fan of his game.

I rather have snell than oubre. Snell was a top 3pt % shooter....and long enough to play defense on similar players that oubre would guard. But snell shoots better and will be cheaper. Burks, Fournier....we have a lot of 1yr or short term deals these guys will take, once the market drys up especially. Similar approach to last year while still improving the team. Oubre just seems a little high for what he brings, in my opinion. But I've been wrong b4.