fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:2 things to take advantage of their connections, which is why they were brought in to begin with;

1 is Brunson. Uber efficient PG that is young enough to grow with the young guys. We don’t need to elaborate on this one because it’s been discussed plenty lately

2 is manipulate draft process to get Shaedon Sharpe. I don’t know much about him but his profile screams star potential. He’s a Kentucky recruit who might be repped by CAA for all we know, but could easily go dark and avoid working out for other teams to steer his way to the Knicks. Can move up using a future protected pick or the Dallas 2023 pick. This draft can yield us another player in the Quickley, Grimes, Toppin, Reddish range or we can take a stab at a real future star who can grow alongside Barrett. Coming out of the summer with a good PG and a developmental prospect who has real difference maker upside can turn the tides on the franchise in ways that this front office needs to accomplish.

you are worse than Briggs... at least he says the names of his crush in the title

Brunson... undersized guard with defensive liabilities who doesnt help you attack the basket. Works with the space created by one of the NBA's best players. There is no path at acquire beyond throwing draft assets or another player in a sigh and trade

Wecome to the offseason where Knixkik is going to start a new "this is a good direction" thread with #1 saying "get Brunson" despite no logical path to get him. Dallas would be willing... they play as well without him as they do with him.

Maybe Burks/Simms and a FRP for a sign and trade with Brunson. Yeah... that sounds very Isiah like. We can look forward to 3-4 years of Brunson for $20mm per and talk about how steady he is

Disagree. Dude is a craftsman in the paint and the number back it up. Dude shoots like 60% from there. He can also create under pressure.
https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1628973/shooting

Youtube Brunson. Awesome. Most of that video is him dribbling around until he gets his shot off.

You win. Knixkik also. Brunson is awesome. I love him too now. Forget the defensive issues with building around him for the next 4-5 years.

Lets just focus on reality

BigDaddyG... what path would you suggest to acquiring him and why does Dallas let him come?

I'm not sure and I agree, that there is a price that may be too high. If a sign and trade with Mitch is all it took, then I'd be down. I'm just pushing back against the idea that Brunson is a scrub who wouldn't help the team. He would be a huge upgrade.

never said he was a scrub. Never. I have said several times he's a very good BB player. Brunson would have been a HUGE help THIS year. The question is moving forward does he make sense and I have laid out reasons why he does NOT (starting with acquisition costs)

Here's some reasons from a Mav's fan:

Brunson has had a really good year and has been an important part of the teams success this year. His numbers goes down against Westen Conference playoff contenders and he still has been marginalized by lengthy defenders. While he's definitely worth a pay raise, I dont think he's worth $20M a year and think it would be a mistake to give him such a contract. How he plays in this years playoffs will be critical.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mavericks/comments/tygs4p/the_athletic_the_pistons_have_real_interest_in/

Eh, that Reddit quote is like linking a quote from some one here that says Mitch is a $20M per year center on the open market. From a on the court perspective, I think he make sense due to his ability to break down the defense and score/ in the paint. He's also good at manipulating the pick and roll. He's be a welcome addition. But you're right, it depends on the cost and we won't really know that until the FA market opens.

read the whole thread.. its interesting. It certainly serves my argument which is that Brunson makes no sense because he's a high cost acquisition with low ceiling because of his physical limitations. Thats it.

Basically Mavs fans: "If he's shut down in the playoffs again there's no point in committing to him"
Knick fans: "playoffs???? we talking about playoffs???"

Lastly... your youtube video shows Brunson's best attribute is scoring. He's not an elite playmaker. This isnt a CP3 guy who makes everyone better. His #s are not better enough than Burks (as a starter) last year to warrent ANY of the kind of moves it would take to get him (trading for cap space, letting Mitch walk, using assets in a S&T)

Really lastly... the Knicks are not "one player or one position" away from anything. If we are being totally honest with this roster its in the early stages at best. We are seeing assets turned into guys like IQ/Grimes/Sims/McBride/Rokus... Keep Mitch, keep developing these guys, keep drafting well.

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:2 things to take advantage of their connections, which is why they were brought in to begin with;

1 is Brunson. Uber efficient PG that is young enough to grow with the young guys. We don’t need to elaborate on this one because it’s been discussed plenty lately

2 is manipulate draft process to get Shaedon Sharpe. I don’t know much about him but his profile screams star potential. He’s a Kentucky recruit who might be repped by CAA for all we know, but could easily go dark and avoid working out for other teams to steer his way to the Knicks. Can move up using a future protected pick or the Dallas 2023 pick. This draft can yield us another player in the Quickley, Grimes, Toppin, Reddish range or we can take a stab at a real future star who can grow alongside Barrett. Coming out of the summer with a good PG and a developmental prospect who has real difference maker upside can turn the tides on the franchise in ways that this front office needs to accomplish.

you are worse than Briggs... at least he says the names of his crush in the title

Brunson... undersized guard with defensive liabilities who doesnt help you attack the basket. Works with the space created by one of the NBA's best players. There is no path at acquire beyond throwing draft assets or another player in a sigh and trade

Wecome to the offseason where Knixkik is going to start a new "this is a good direction" thread with #1 saying "get Brunson" despite no logical path to get him. Dallas would be willing... they play as well without him as they do with him.

Maybe Burks/Simms and a FRP for a sign and trade with Brunson. Yeah... that sounds very Isiah like. We can look forward to 3-4 years of Brunson for $20mm per and talk about how steady he is

Have you ever watched Brunson play? His best attribute is getting into the lane. He’s also a quality defender who gets a bad rep only because of his size. He’s literally the opposite of how you just described him. I was this same way with Fred VanVleet and only a few bought in. I see a repeat here. And there’s a ton of logical paths to get Brunson. My threads are few and far between but I stay fairly consistent with my plans and usually those players excel: VanVleet, DeRozan, Haliburton, and bane. All players I pushed for that were attainable and excelling.

I have watched him and I am going on what Mavs fans think of him.

Quickly gets in the lane also. And IQ is bigger, longer and more athletic. Lets go with him and keep Mitch. Mitch is more important than adding a small scoring guard

FVV was a proven playoff performer and is one of the better defensive guards around. Pls dont mix him with Brunson. Pls

Brunson is significantly different as far as getting into the lane as quickley. Also compare his 2 point efficiency compared to Quickley. If you think quickley gets into the lane, you will love Brunson. He’s nothing special but will solidify a position that hasn’t been the case in many peoples lifetimes. I was a fan of making quickley our starting Pg and signing DeRozan. But I feel like the front office wants a true PG and keep quickley in his role.

bingo!!!! your words not mine. Brunson is NOT trash. He's a good BB player. We are not a team who can afford to give up any assets and commit to player just to "solidify a position."

The point about IQ isnt that he's better than Brunson. He's not. Yet. The point is there is NO PATH to acquiring Brunson that makes sense for the Knicks unless your goal is to lock us into a 45 win first round team at best for the next 5 years.

Wait and keep building. MANY of the best PGs took YEARS to develop. We are no a title caliber team with a big hole to fill. We are a lottery team.

You underestimate what getting a solid PG like Brunson does for the development of everyone else. Developing blindly does nothing. You add pieces that can enhance the rest of the roster. We both agree that he is a solid player and not a star. Where we differ is what adding a solid player like him can do for a team. Adding Derrick rose last year was the best example. It can provide similar impact.

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:2 things to take advantage of their connections, which is why they were brought in to begin with;

1 is Brunson. Uber efficient PG that is young enough to grow with the young guys. We don’t need to elaborate on this one because it’s been discussed plenty lately

2 is manipulate draft process to get Shaedon Sharpe. I don’t know much about him but his profile screams star potential. He’s a Kentucky recruit who might be repped by CAA for all we know, but could easily go dark and avoid working out for other teams to steer his way to the Knicks. Can move up using a future protected pick or the Dallas 2023 pick. This draft can yield us another player in the Quickley, Grimes, Toppin, Reddish range or we can take a stab at a real future star who can grow alongside Barrett. Coming out of the summer with a good PG and a developmental prospect who has real difference maker upside can turn the tides on the franchise in ways that this front office needs to accomplish.

you are worse than Briggs... at least he says the names of his crush in the title

Brunson... undersized guard with defensive liabilities who doesnt help you attack the basket. Works with the space created by one of the NBA's best players. There is no path at acquire beyond throwing draft assets or another player in a sigh and trade

Wecome to the offseason where Knixkik is going to start a new "this is a good direction" thread with #1 saying "get Brunson" despite no logical path to get him. Dallas would be willing... they play as well without him as they do with him.

Maybe Burks/Simms and a FRP for a sign and trade with Brunson. Yeah... that sounds very Isiah like. We can look forward to 3-4 years of Brunson for $20mm per and talk about how steady he is

Disagree. Dude is a craftsman in the paint and the number back it up. Dude shoots like 60% from there. He can also create under pressure.
https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1628973/shooting

Youtube Brunson. Awesome. Most of that video is him dribbling around until he gets his shot off.

You win. Knixkik also. Brunson is awesome. I love him too now. Forget the defensive issues with building around him for the next 4-5 years.

Lets just focus on reality

BigDaddyG... what path would you suggest to acquiring him and why does Dallas let him come?

I'm not sure and I agree, that there is a price that may be too high. If a sign and trade with Mitch is all it took, then I'd be down. I'm just pushing back against the idea that Brunson is a scrub who wouldn't help the team. He would be a huge upgrade.

never said he was a scrub. Never. I have said several times he's a very good BB player. Brunson would have been a HUGE help THIS year. The question is moving forward does he make sense and I have laid out reasons why he does NOT (starting with acquisition costs)

Here's some reasons from a Mav's fan:

Brunson has had a really good year and has been an important part of the teams success this year. His numbers goes down against Westen Conference playoff contenders and he still has been marginalized by lengthy defenders. While he's definitely worth a pay raise, I dont think he's worth $20M a year and think it would be a mistake to give him such a contract. How he plays in this years playoffs will be critical.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mavericks/comments/tygs4p/the_athletic_the_pistons_have_real_interest_in/

Eh, that Reddit quote is like linking a quote from some one here that says Mitch is a $20M per year center on the open market. From a on the court perspective, I think he make sense due to his ability to break down the defense and score/ in the paint. He's also good at manipulating the pick and roll. He's be a welcome addition. But you're right, it depends on the cost and we won't really know that until the FA market opens.

read the whole thread.. its interesting. It certainly serves my argument which is that Brunson makes no sense because he's a high cost acquisition with low ceiling because of his physical limitations. Thats it.

Basically Mavs fans: "If he's shut down in the playoffs again there's no point in committing to him"
Knick fans: "playoffs???? we talking about playoffs???"

Lastly... your youtube video shows Brunson's best attribute is scoring. He's not an elite playmaker. This isnt a CP3 guy who makes everyone better. His #s are not better enough than Burks (as a starter) last year to warrent ANY of the kind of moves it would take to get him (trading for cap space, letting Mitch walk, using assets in a S&T)

Really lastly... the Knicks are not "one player or one position" away from anything. If we are being totally honest with this roster its in the early stages at best. We are seeing assets turned into guys like IQ/Grimes/Sims/McBride/Rokus... Keep Mitch, keep developing these guys, keep drafting well.

Random Knicks fan(whose names includes the numbers 1248): Mitch Robinson sucks, he runs slow, his hands sucks and he'll be lucky to get $9M a year on the open market.
Random Mavs fan: Check out this thread on ultimateknicks.com. I told you MitchRob is trash! He won't impact our team at all!
Sorry, I'm not giving any serious credence to a Reddit thread, unless I'm looking for a cool meme.
Jalen is clearly better than Burks and he's proven that he's exponentially better in the games he played without Luka. No, Brunson isn't prime Chris Paul, but there arent many that are. But he's a lot better than what we have and the guy can be a playmaker. There's no need to sell the guy short. He excels at areas the team is weak at. I get wanting to keep the young guys. But it's not realistic. You have to let a few go at some point. The best you can hope for is to get assets back for them.
https://stathead.com/tiny/vLI0u

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:2 things to take advantage of their connections, which is why they were brought in to begin with;

1 is Brunson. Uber efficient PG that is young enough to grow with the young guys. We don’t need to elaborate on this one because it’s been discussed plenty lately

2 is manipulate draft process to get Shaedon Sharpe. I don’t know much about him but his profile screams star potential. He’s a Kentucky recruit who might be repped by CAA for all we know, but could easily go dark and avoid working out for other teams to steer his way to the Knicks. Can move up using a future protected pick or the Dallas 2023 pick. This draft can yield us another player in the Quickley, Grimes, Toppin, Reddish range or we can take a stab at a real future star who can grow alongside Barrett. Coming out of the summer with a good PG and a developmental prospect who has real difference maker upside can turn the tides on the franchise in ways that this front office needs to accomplish.

you are worse than Briggs... at least he says the names of his crush in the title

Brunson... undersized guard with defensive liabilities who doesnt help you attack the basket. Works with the space created by one of the NBA's best players. There is no path at acquire beyond throwing draft assets or another player in a sigh and trade

Wecome to the offseason where Knixkik is going to start a new "this is a good direction" thread with #1 saying "get Brunson" despite no logical path to get him. Dallas would be willing... they play as well without him as they do with him.

Maybe Burks/Simms and a FRP for a sign and trade with Brunson. Yeah... that sounds very Isiah like. We can look forward to 3-4 years of Brunson for $20mm per and talk about how steady he is

Disagree. Dude is a craftsman in the paint and the number back it up. Dude shoots like 60% from there. He can also create under pressure.
https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1628973/shooting

Youtube Brunson. Awesome. Most of that video is him dribbling around until he gets his shot off.

You win. Knixkik also. Brunson is awesome. I love him too now. Forget the defensive issues with building around him for the next 4-5 years.

Lets just focus on reality

BigDaddyG... what path would you suggest to acquiring him and why does Dallas let him come?

I'm not sure and I agree, that there is a price that may be too high. If a sign and trade with Mitch is all it took, then I'd be down. I'm just pushing back against the idea that Brunson is a scrub who wouldn't help the team. He would be a huge upgrade.

never said he was a scrub. Never. I have said several times he's a very good BB player. Brunson would have been a HUGE help THIS year. The question is moving forward does he make sense and I have laid out reasons why he does NOT (starting with acquisition costs)

Here's some reasons from a Mav's fan:

Brunson has had a really good year and has been an important part of the teams success this year. His numbers goes down against Westen Conference playoff contenders and he still has been marginalized by lengthy defenders. While he's definitely worth a pay raise, I dont think he's worth $20M a year and think it would be a mistake to give him such a contract. How he plays in this years playoffs will be critical.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mavericks/comments/tygs4p/the_athletic_the_pistons_have_real_interest_in/

Eh, that Reddit quote is like linking a quote from some one here that says Mitch is a $20M per year center on the open market. From a on the court perspective, I think he make sense due to his ability to break down the defense and score/ in the paint. He's also good at manipulating the pick and roll. He's be a welcome addition. But you're right, it depends on the cost and we won't really know that until the FA market opens.

read the whole thread.. its interesting. It certainly serves my argument which is that Brunson makes no sense because he's a high cost acquisition with low ceiling because of his physical limitations. Thats it.

Basically Mavs fans: "If he's shut down in the playoffs again there's no point in committing to him"
Knick fans: "playoffs???? we talking about playoffs???"

Lastly... your youtube video shows Brunson's best attribute is scoring. He's not an elite playmaker. This isnt a CP3 guy who makes everyone better. His #s are not better enough than Burks (as a starter) last year to warrent ANY of the kind of moves it would take to get him (trading for cap space, letting Mitch walk, using assets in a S&T)

Really lastly... the Knicks are not "one player or one position" away from anything. If we are being totally honest with this roster its in the early stages at best. We are seeing assets turned into guys like IQ/Grimes/Sims/McBride/Rokus... Keep Mitch, keep developing these guys, keep drafting well.

Random Knicks fan(whose names includes the numbers 1248): Mitch Robinson sucks, he runs slow, his hands sucks and he'll be lucky to get $9M a year on the open market.
Random Mavs fan: Check out this thread on ultimateknicks.com. I told you MitchRob is trash! He won't impact our team at all!
Sorry, I'm not giving any serious credence to a Reddit thread, unless I'm looking for a cool meme.
Jalen is clearly better than Burks and he's proven that he's exponentially better in the games he played without Luka. No, Brunson isn't prime Chris Paul, but there arent many that are. But he's a lot better than what we have and the guy can be a playmaker. There's no need to sell the guy short. He excels at areas the team is weak at. I get wanting to keep the young guys. But it's not realistic. You have to let a few go at some point. The best you can hope for is to get assets back for them.
https://stathead.com/tiny/vLI0u

how is Brunson clearly better than Burks? Looks at Burk's starting #s. He's been very good.

Even if you look at per/36 and danced stats, Brunson is clearly better.

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:My view if we are going to sign a PG to be a starter, the pg should not have any significant holes to his game. Brunson COULD be a solid starter but that is still debatable at this point. He is only a so-so defender and he is undersized. While he seems to a competent pg, he has not really proven that he can run a team full time. Instead of paying Brunson $20 mil a year, I would just start Quickley, hope Rose can stay healthy, and see how McBride looks in year two.

What's your barometer for him to get to that point?

Right. He excelled without Luka in the lineup and plays the point alongside him as a starter. Most teams now have multiple playmakers together in the lineup unless you’re Memphis or something.

The issue is this. Brunson wants $20 mil a year. Is he worth that? Is he even worth $15 mill a year. Maybe $15 mil, but we spent the second half of the season training Quickley to be a point. He actually is starting to look decent and we still have Rose. Is Brunson that much of an upgrade that you essentially lose Quickley, because unless Rose is hurt again next year it will be him and Brunson getting all the pg minutes and we have Grimes as a sg prospect who will need minutes. I think the Knicks should pass on Brunson unless he is willing to sign at like $14 mil a year.

Don't know anything concrete, but if I had to guess, Burks is likely being traded and Kemba isn't coming back. And I like Rose, but it's foolish to count on him not to missing a lot of games next season. I think the minutes will be there for Quick, tho maybe not as "point guard." But there's a scenario where Rose, if he's healthy, splits time on and off ball with Quick in the second unit. My only question would be Thib's flexibility with the rotation.

BigDaddyG wrote:

TheGame wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

TheGame wrote:My view if we are going to sign a PG to be a starter, the pg should not have any significant holes to his game. Brunson COULD be a solid starter but that is still debatable at this point. He is only a so-so defender and he is undersized. While he seems to a competent pg, he has not really proven that he can run a team full time. Instead of paying Brunson $20 mil a year, I would just start Quickley, hope Rose can stay healthy, and see how McBride looks in year two.

What's your barometer for him to get to that point?

Right. He excelled without Luka in the lineup and plays the point alongside him as a starter. Most teams now have multiple playmakers together in the lineup unless you’re Memphis or something.

The issue is this. Brunson wants $20 mil a year. Is he worth that? Is he even worth $15 mill a year. Maybe $15 mil, but we spent the second half of the season training Quickley to be a point. He actually is starting to look decent and we still have Rose. Is Brunson that much of an upgrade that you essentially lose Quickley, because unless Rose is hurt again next year it will be him and Brunson getting all the pg minutes and we have Grimes as a sg prospect who will need minutes. I think the Knicks should pass on Brunson unless he is willing to sign at like $14 mil a year.

Don't know anything concrete, but if I had to guess, Burks is likely being traded and Kemba isn't coming back. And I like Rose, but it's foolish to count on him not to missing a lot of games next season. I think the minutes will be there for Quick, tho maybe not as "point guard." But there's a scenario where Rose, if he's healthy, splits time on and off ball with Quick in the second unit. My only question would be Thib's flexibility with the rotation.

Brunson is an upgrade to IQ.

Any of the aforementioned can be traded.

Nalod said Brunson is in the same situation as Robinson. So Dallas would also be able to go over the cap to sign him once Brunson hits free agency for a big contract because they have his Bird rights. Because he thinks he's worth more than THT or Robert Swift got, the only way to get it is to hit FA.

Once Brunson hits FA the Knicks will be able to offer the MLE. Since he's hitting FA because he wants a bigger payday, I don't think his organizational ties wiplease matter.

Knicks could do a sign and trade with Dallas for him, but he would need to agree to it.

It makes no sense to me why he would. Lower taxes in Texas and less pressure because Donicic is the man, he doesn't seem like the kind of guy trying to build his brand. Also, Dallas has looked great since the trade deadline and anything can happen in the playoffs. I don't think it's realistic to talk about Brunson now that Dallas turned it's season around.

A more likely trade would be Taj, Noel, Obi, and a 2023 2nd rounder for THJ.

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:2 things to take advantage of their connections, which is why they were brought in to begin with;

1 is Brunson. Uber efficient PG that is young enough to grow with the young guys. We don’t need to elaborate on this one because it’s been discussed plenty lately

2 is manipulate draft process to get Shaedon Sharpe. I don’t know much about him but his profile screams star potential. He’s a Kentucky recruit who might be repped by CAA for all we know, but could easily go dark and avoid working out for other teams to steer his way to the Knicks. Can move up using a future protected pick or the Dallas 2023 pick. This draft can yield us another player in the Quickley, Grimes, Toppin, Reddish range or we can take a stab at a real future star who can grow alongside Barrett. Coming out of the summer with a good PG and a developmental prospect who has real difference maker upside can turn the tides on the franchise in ways that this front office needs to accomplish.

you are worse than Briggs... at least he says the names of his crush in the title

Brunson... undersized guard with defensive liabilities who doesnt help you attack the basket. Works with the space created by one of the NBA's best players. There is no path at acquire beyond throwing draft assets or another player in a sigh and trade

Wecome to the offseason where Knixkik is going to start a new "this is a good direction" thread with #1 saying "get Brunson" despite no logical path to get him. Dallas would be willing... they play as well without him as they do with him.

Maybe Burks/Simms and a FRP for a sign and trade with Brunson. Yeah... that sounds very Isiah like. We can look forward to 3-4 years of Brunson for $20mm per and talk about how steady he is

Knixkik wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:I'm not even sure Brunson is a big upgrade over Burks. You are trading 3 point efficiency for 2 point efficiency.

Except Brunson is also efficient from 3pt. And he’s a playmaker/ passer.

This season. Historically this is Brunson's best season from 3 and Burks worst from 2 so some regression to the mean is possible going forward for both players which would only help the case for Burks. As starters Brunson averages 1.5 more assists per game. If Brunson were coming on a 10 million contract he would certainly be a better deal, beyond that, it gets iffy.

That's why I would rather swing for Lillard. If Knicks are going to be giving up assets in a trade, we need a clear difference maker.

Knixkik wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:I'm not even sure Brunson is a big upgrade over Burks. You are trading 3 point efficiency for 2 point efficiency.

Except Brunson is also efficient from 3pt. And he’s a playmaker/ passer.

This season. Historically this is Brunson's best season from 3 and Burks worst from 2 so some regression to the mean is possible going forward for both players which would only help the case for Burks. As starters Brunson averages 1.5 more assists per game. If Brunson were coming on a 10 million contract he would certainly be a better deal, beyond that, it gets iffy.

That's why I would rather swing for Lillard. If Knicks are going to be giving up assets in a trade, we need a clear difference maker.

Brunson and Burks career 3pt % is separated by less than 1 percentage point. Meanwhile Brunson has a 2pt % of greater than 10 for his career. Brunson shot over 40% from 3 last season and had his regression back to his career average this season. This thread shows me people don’t watch him play or even look at the stats.

And I’m a huge Lillard fan. But a player his age, I don’t know what it gets us long term. I’d rather a player who can grow with our young group that’s been showing some real promise. And the cost would be far less. I thought getting Ball would be a good building block with this team last summer, but Brunson is better and doesn’t have the injury history.

Since Brunson has been in the league Burks has shot better from 3 than Brunson every season. Brunson is much better at getting to the rim. No, I admit I'm just going by the stats and the unimpressive game he had vs NY.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying Brunson isn't good- I'm saying the Knicks will have to give up assets to get him in a sign and trade, meaning we would have to offer a big contract and something that Dallas wants. What's your feeling about 90 million over 3 years and we send out Barrett Toppin IQ Grimes and Fournier?