It would appear to me that you don't build a championship team by trading 1st Rounders and $20M+ salaries to a back-up PG. You save the assets and cap space to make a future move on an "A" player.....otherwise you end up discontent about owing a guy $100M who will not move the needle much in terms of playoff standing.

Jalen Brunson is a 25 Year Old - 2nd Round Pick (#33) in 2018 who has 4 years under his belt - mostly as a back-up on a decent team with an all world PG and will be 26 years old next season. They smallish PG plays defense similar to Kemba but some Knicks fans who have complained about the team's bringing in offensive focused players and lack of defensive effort for a Defensive minded HC are salivating over giving up the house for the honor of paying this guy $100M over the next 4 years to not play defense.

Deuce McBride is a 21 Year Old - 2nd Round Pick in 2021 (#36) who is a defense first rookie and mostly TBD on offense to most fans on a ****ty Knicks team for a coach who's tough in terms of new guys earning their minutes. Many of the same Knicks fans who are salivating about Brunson would rather throw McBride in the trash rather than waiting on his development over the next 4 years that they did not have to wait in Brunson.

jskinny35 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

TPercy wrote:

fishmike wrote:yeah a Brunson thread.

No.
He's not trash, but he's a low impact player. All this does is kick the can down the road. You might get short term boost in PG but you spend to get him here. NO NO NO NO.

Both McBride and Quickly have higher upside than this guy. Why do we want to lock ourselves into mediocrity?

Dunno about McBride

he's bigger stronger longer and more explosive. They were similar in college except of course McBride was regarded as on of college basketball's best defenders. Something you will never get with Brunson. He'll try hard. Jose Calderon tried hard also.

I wouldn't say they were that similar in college. Brunson is a national player of the year, all-american and two national championship winner. Yes, McBride is bigger. But Jalen has been playing point guard all of his life, while McBride is still learning the position. Brunson is a natural playmaker. Also, Brunson is much better in the paint despite being smaller and less explosive. Even when they were at similar levels in college.

Best case scenario is we land Brunson and hold onto McBride. DRose is getting up there so it never hurts to have 2 quality PG's that offer varying abilities.

Philc1 wrote:

TPercy wrote:

fishmike wrote:yeah a Brunson thread.

No.
He's not trash, but he's a low impact player. All this does is kick the can down the road. You might get short term boost in PG but you spend to get him here. NO NO NO NO.

Both McBride and Quickly have higher upside than this guy. Why do we want to lock ourselves into mediocrity?

Dunno about Mcbride

I’d rather keep Mitch and trade for Dinwiddie. Mark Cuban likes our players so for Dinwiddie it would probably just cost Burks, Noel and a future 2nd rounder

Dallas is playing so much better with Dinwiddie, Brunson, Doncic than with KP. Why they giving up Dinwiddie?

Jmpasq wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:

TPercy wrote:not sure i want to give up dallas's pick and burks just to get brunson on a long term deal.

I like Brunson and def think he's solid. What I would like to see if Luka being out for awhile to see how Brunson does in the primary ball-handling role as that would be more similar to the role he would have here. I worry him playing next to Luka makes him look better then he actually is (since Luka's a terrific player).

20 points and 7.5 assists without Luka this season. https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/jalen-brunson-stats-without-luka-doncic-this-season#:~:text=Jalen%20Brunson%20has%20averaged%2019.7,without%20Luka%20Doncic%20this%20season.

Numbers speak for themselves. He’s a good player. FVV 2.0.

except without the defense. ITs not even close. FVV is a really good defensive player and that is where Brunson is trash.

Welcome back to the days where every opposing guard has a career night in the garden. No thanks

We just got an upclose look at a bad defensive guard in Kemba next to Fournier. Like no

You're right, Fournier has to go if we get Brunson. Play some combination of Barrett, Grimes, Reddish, and Burks on the wing. We have to many 2-guards anyway

Brunson is a good defensive player.

TPercy wrote:I've thought about this lineup and one of my reservations is that you still have 3-4 ppl who really need the ball. The onus will really have to be on Thibs creating a free flowing offense where people will be switching between handling the ball and being a shooter. My hope is that a guy like Grimes steps up to be our reggie bullock. I've warmed up to the idea of brunson, but under no circumstances should we forfeit a 1st to make this happen.

The value in Brunson is not being a PG who needs the ball all the time. He’s experienced and successful developing alongside Luka as an off ball threat and secondary playmaker, but can still be the offensive engine and lead playmaker and get into the lane. This lineup lacks spacing only because of Mitch, which is the case with any Mitch lineup. The step further would be a Myles Turner center replacement, but either way you have a center and SG in Fournier who don’t need the ball, and it is an offense built around Barrett, Randle and Brunson. And I agree on Grimes, I see him as a Bullock for this team with obviously more offensive upside.

franco12 wrote:How do you get rid of Burks when he has been the best player on the team?

It’s getting to the point where our roster is what it is and moving guys is going to be a bit harder as we’ll be capped out.

If I can sign him into Noel & Walker’s slot, then maybe. Heck I might even toss Derek Rose out since at 33 I am not sure what I can honestly count on him for next year production/health wise.

I'm definitely not giving up Burks. Burks has done well based on the circumstances he has been in. Move him back to wings and we get a much better player.

Knixkik wrote:Have to wonder if the front office considers a Randle for Brunson and Bullock type trade in the offseason if Brunson wants to come. Knicks definitely play faster and looser without Randle, and Brunson can really bring an extra level out of Barrett and Toppin. But I believe he can also do the same for Randle. So we will see. Randle would likely welcome a trade back home to Dallas if he and the Knicks part ways and the Mavericks might see a fit with Doncic.

Thats two front offices. I don’t think we need Bullock unless we are swapping out Cam as part of any trade.
Its entirely possible Dallas or any other team be like “You go get Cam, then we can talk……….. This part of a draft night deal or the lauded sign and trade scenario. Fact is we have to move cap to sign cap.
Trades happen in lots of strange ways.

Does dallas want to play less “faster and looser” with Randle? Is Jules “issues” indigenous to knicks or do they carry over with him via trade. If not, can he fix. His **** here without a trade?

Knixkik wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Have to wonder if the front office considers a Randle for Brunson and Bullock type trade in the offseason if Brunson wants to come. Knicks definitely play faster and looser without Randle, and Brunson can really bring an extra level out of Barrett and Toppin. But I believe he can also do the same for Randle. So we will see. Randle would likely welcome a trade back home to Dallas if he and the Knicks part ways and the Mavericks might see a fit with Doncic.

Thats two front offices. I don’t think we need Bullock unless we are swapping out Cam as part of any trade.
Its entirely possible Dallas or any other team be like “You go get Cam, then we can talk……….. This part of a draft night deal or the lauded sign and trade scenario. Fact is we have to move cap to sign cap.
Trades happen in lots of strange ways.

Does dallas want to play less “faster and looser” with Randle? Is Jules “issues” indigenous to knicks or do they carry over with him via trade. If not, can he fix. His **** here without a trade?

Getting back Bullock would be strictly for salary purposes.

That would also seem like a perfect dick move by our FO to Randle. Trading Randle away to end up getting his buddy back. LMAO.

Brunson, Fournier, Barrett, Toppin, Mitch starting
DRose, Quickley, Grimes, Reddish, Sims as the bench mob

The starting lineup with Brunson, Toppin, and Mitch shooting 50% or better would make for a very efficient starting 5 that we never got this season. But it would require Barrett and Toppin both taking that next step to be a good team. While the team still needs to make a big star move eventually, the front office and Dolan would be able to keep the pressure off because Toppin is such a fan favorite. Winning with that team would be special, and losing would still be tolerable. Brunson plus a healthy drose can be a good engine for a fast offense without much iso.