HofstraBBall wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Randle and the 11 to Portland for 7, Bledsoe and Winslow. I’m all in on Shaedon Sharpe.

42 Mousa Diabate, though I hope the FO would have the skill to get him to play overseas for a year or two to fill out a bit. Roster spots are becoming a premium.

This type of trade has been in the back of my mind for a while now too.

https://dailyknicks.com/2022/06/18/3-teams-knicks-make-trade-2022-nba-draft/amp/2/

This guy really wants Randle off the Knicks.
Think this is exactly the move the FO will NOT make. The y are not reaching nor overpaying.
Do not see them trading their best player(and more) for a player who's last game was with an AAU team. Sorry Randle foes. Not happening.

I'll pick Adbaji, Branham. Although feel Davis will be available as well.

However, still leaning towards what the FO has done in past. Trade down when seeing better value below.

I understand your sentiment. That said, how are you fixing the starting lineup without making any changes? Do you just presume the same squad with the same coach will just be better? That starting lineup has zero chemistry. Something has to change.

It's looking like we probably will not have the same starting 5.

I am hoping we start IQ and/or bring in a reasonably priced FA. Jones maybe. Also hoping Grimes continues to show up and takes more EF minutes and shows he can start. Still think that EFs 3pt shooting can be useful but as a spark off the bench. Problem is that the FO will look to trade him if that is the case since he is getting starter money. Either way, if EF starts the year strong and first unit does well then I am okay with it. If he does not play well and Grimes seems like a better choice as a starter then we can trade him at the deadline.

Another major change may come at the C. Many here feel the PG is our biggest need. Which I would agree. But will be curious to see what happens at the C position. If we lose MR then I feel it is wide open for what the FO does next. They may pick a C at the 11. Or look to trade for one using some draft assets. Not sure if adding a stretch 5 and losing MR makes us better. But who knows.

Going back to previous post, just not on board with trading Randle and assuming that fixes our problems last year. Think it's a better conclusion that losing two of our predetermined main PG's was more of a cause to our struggles. I get no one likes Randle right now. Heck, I am not of fan of his ball hogging. But I do know he is a real good player. Proved it a year ago. So why the rush to dump him at his lowest value? Make some obvious needed changes (stability at PG) see how he adjusts, maybe put in a quicker paced offense with the first unit, and if does not work and Randle seems to be the problem, trade him at the deadline along with EF, Burkes and go young.

The issue is that I don’t think Randle and Barrett coexist and I wasn’t really impressed with either this past season. I liked that RJ got his shot, but he didn’t really facilitate the offense, he needs to be better if he is the face of the team. And he a Randle had pretty obvious chemistry issues. The ball movement is just terrible with those two on the court together.

In my head, Randle and Barrett could both be good pieces of a legitimate team, but they are pieces 3&4 not 1&2. As if Draymond Green and Andrew Wiggins were trying to build a team. I’d love to be wrong, but their collective eFG is not pulling us out of the Lottery. I see Shaeden Sharpe and I think I see a kid I could build a franchise around. I’ve been wrong before and may be again, but I think that kid is going to make a franchise very happy. For that, there really isn’t a lot I wouldn’t move to pick that kid up. Clearly not everyone feels the way I do, but I didn’t like Cade with same feelings I have here.

HofstraBBall wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Randle and the 11 to Portland for 7, Bledsoe and Winslow. I’m all in on Shaedon Sharpe.

42 Mousa Diabate, though I hope the FO would have the skill to get him to play overseas for a year or two to fill out a bit. Roster spots are becoming a premium.

This type of trade has been in the back of my mind for a while now too.

I'll pick Adbaji, Branham. Although feel Davis will be available as well.

However, still leaning towards what the FO has done in past. Trade down when seeing better value below.

I understand your sentiment. That said, how are you fixing the starting lineup without making any changes? Do you just presume the same squad with the same coach will just be better? That starting lineup has zero chemistry. Something has to change.

Going back to previous post, just not on board with trading Randle and assuming that fixes our problems last year. Make some obvious needed changes (stability at PG) see how he adjusts, maybe put in a quicker paced offense with the first unit, and if does not work and Randle seems to be the problem, trade him at the deadline along with EF, Burkes and go young.

The issue is that I don’t think Randle and Barrett coexist and I wasn’t really impressed with either this past season. I liked that RJ got his shot, but he didn’t really facilitate the offense, he needs to be better if he is the face of the team. And he a Randle had pretty obvious chemistry issues. The ball movement is just terrible with those two on the court together.

In my head, Randle and Barrett could both be good pieces of a legitimate team, but they are pieces 3&4 not 1&2. As if Draymond Green and Andrew Wiggins were trying to build a team. I’d love to be wrong, but their collective eFG is not pulling us out of the Lottery. I see Shaeden Sharpe and I think I see a kid I could build a franchise around. I’ve been wrong before and may be again, but I think that kid is going to make a franchise very happy. For that, there really isn’t a lot I wouldn’t move to pick that kid up. Clearly not everyone feels the way I do, but I didn’t like Cade with same feelings I have here.

The question for me is what are the alternatives? Trading one or two very good players that just one year ago seemed to make a difference seems risky. Even more so for a chance at a kid that has yet to prove much. Do agree Sharpe has potential and is extremely athletic but we have seen many of these types in the past drafts go on to fail. Do not see the Knicks giving up their two best players, nor any team in the league, in order to take on that type of risk. I just see a better alternative as staying the course and finding a way to add another really good player to the team. Hopefully one that is better than Randle and RJ. Feel the FO feels the same way. The rumors seem to be all around adding a player like DM without giving up Randle or RJ. Or getting Ivey by offering draft assets and Obi, IQ, or Grimes.

Would agree that neither RJ or Randle seem like first options. Still feel they are very good players that will continue to improve. In terms of Randle's and RJ's chemistry. Is it a chemistry issue? Think it is more about RJ and Randle being shoot first players. Agree that both need to work on passing and overall basketball IQ. However, several teams if not most have multiple players that are shoot first. Some were saying earlier this year Tatum and Brown could not coexist for that reason. Early on in their careers, some said the same about Curry and Thompson. Just do not agree that just because RJ and Randle seem focused on looking for their own shot, it is a reason to trade them. Think there are other issues. First off, what are the half court sets being implemented? What is the pace in which Thibs wants to run? More importantly, who is running the offense? Think getting a TRUE PG would drastically help all of these. The PG is the one that can distribute the ball effectively and helps an offensive flow(chemistry). Randle had his best year with Payton, not an elite guard by any means, but one that was a true PG. And Rose, another true PG. IMO, The bigger issue over 'chemistry' when talking about RJ and Randle is RJ's upcoming salary. Feel that will be more of an issue with the FO.

That's just it. I would rather take swings and miss - and fail - than be mediocre. You pull a Ja Morant and you can be a competitive franchise for a decade. You get a player good enough to re-sign but not enough to win a chip and you get the 7-15 pick for 8 years.

I think there are choices. You can move some other assets to add to RJ and JR. My point is that the starting lineup needs to be changed. I think its more than adding a PG. Neither Barrett nor Randle move without the ball. I think its hard to add a PG where the PG must hand Randle the ball or Barrett the ball and move on.

HofstraBBall wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Randle and the 11 to Portland for 7, Bledsoe and Winslow. I’m all in on Shaedon Sharpe.

42 Mousa Diabate, though I hope the FO would have the skill to get him to play overseas for a year or two to fill out a bit. Roster spots are becoming a premium.

This type of trade has been in the back of my mind for a while now too.

I'll pick Adbaji, Branham. Although feel Davis will be available as well.

However, still leaning towards what the FO has done in past. Trade down when seeing better value below.

I understand your sentiment. That said, how are you fixing the starting lineup without making any changes? Do you just presume the same squad with the same coach will just be better? That starting lineup has zero chemistry. Something has to change.

Going back to previous post, just not on board with trading Randle and assuming that fixes our problems last year. Make some obvious needed changes (stability at PG) see how he adjusts, maybe put in a quicker paced offense with the first unit, and if does not work and Randle seems to be the problem, trade him at the deadline along with EF, Burkes and go young.

The issue is that I don’t think Randle and Barrett coexist and I wasn’t really impressed with either this past season. I liked that RJ got his shot, but he didn’t really facilitate the offense, he needs to be better if he is the face of the team. And he a Randle had pretty obvious chemistry issues. The ball movement is just terrible with those two on the court together.

In my head, Randle and Barrett could both be good pieces of a legitimate team, but they are pieces 3&4 not 1&2. As if Draymond Green and Andrew Wiggins were trying to build a team. I’d love to be wrong, but their collective eFG is not pulling us out of the Lottery. I see Shaeden Sharpe and I think I see a kid I could build a franchise around. I’ve been wrong before and may be again, but I think that kid is going to make a franchise very happy. For that, there really isn’t a lot I wouldn’t move to pick that kid up. Clearly not everyone feels the way I do, but I didn’t like Cade with same feelings I have here.

The question for me is what are the alternatives? Trading one or two very good players that just one year ago seemed to make a difference seems risky. Even more so for a chance at a kid that has yet to prove much. Do agree Sharpe has potential and is extremely athletic but we have seen many of these types in the past drafts go on to fail. Do not see the Knicks giving up their two best players, nor any team in the league, in order to take on that type of risk. I just see a better alternative as staying the course and finding a way to add another really good player to the team. Hopefully one that is better than Randle and RJ. Feel the FO feels the same way. The rumors seem to be all around adding a player like DM without giving up Randle or RJ. Or getting Ivey by offering draft assets and Obi, IQ, or Grimes.

Would agree that neither RJ or Randle seem like first options. Still feel they are very good players that will continue to improve. In terms of Randle's and RJ's chemistry. Is it a chemistry issue? Think it is more about RJ and Randle being shoot first players. Agree that both need to work on passing and overall basketball IQ. However, several teams if not most have multiple players that are shoot first. Some were saying earlier this year Tatum and Brown could not coexist for that reason. Early on in their careers, some said the same about Curry and Thompson. Just do not agree that just because RJ and Randle seem focused on looking for their own shot, it is a reason to trade them. Think there are other issues. First off, what are the half court sets being implemented? What is the pace in which Thibs wants to run? More importantly, who is running the offense? Think getting a TRUE PG would drastically help all of these. The PG is the one that can distribute the ball effectively and helps an offensive flow(chemistry). Randle had his best year with Payton, not an elite guard by any means, but one that was a true PG. And Rose, another true PG. IMO, The bigger issue over 'chemistry' when talking about RJ and Randle is RJ's upcoming salary. Feel that will be more of an issue with the FO.

That's just it. I would rather take swings and miss - and fail - than be mediocre. You pull a Ja Morant and you can be a competitive franchise for a decade. You get a player good enough to re-sign but not enough to win a chip and you get the 7-15 pick for 8 years.

I think there are choices. You can move some other assets to add to RJ and JR. My point is that the starting lineup needs to be changed. I think its more than adding a PG. Neither Barrett nor Randle move without the ball. I think its hard to add a PG where the PG must hand Randle the ball or Barrett the ball and move on.

I would rather take a swing at Ivey. But that seems like it would take more than the Knicks are willing to give up. Or is it? Feel he may go top three though.

Do not think we need to give up RJ or Randle to move to the 7 if they were in love with Sharpe. Maybe the 11th, Toppin and a future 1?
But still feel that is too big a risk. If we can do the 11th and a couple seconds, its a steal cuz the kid has natural ability. Btw, take a look at Blake Wesley. Ivey like for our second pick.

From the Athletic:
Shaedon Sharpe, 6-6 freshman guard, Kentucky. “He’s a risk. If you watched his pro day, you’d think he was top three. He didn’t miss, and he took some tough shots. I love his size, I love his athleticism. He’s a great kid with high character. I wonder if he’s too nice. He’s an elite athlete and really good shooter. Those usually make for good NBA players. He and Jaden Ivey are the two best athletes in the draft. Somebody will pick him high because he was the No. 1 player in his class. You can look at the history of those guys, and very few of them have failed. If you’re a GM who’s not worried about getting fired, he’s worth the gamble.”

Most people and pundits agree with you. I’m not so high on Ivey.

My impression is that Ivey is getting bumped up boards due to his resemblance to Morant. I think his game more resembles Jerryd Bayless and will translate like an undersized shooting guard.

I compare him to Sharpe who has great measurements at SG and the rest of the athleticism and shooting package and I am surprised he isn’t being looked at as the #1.

So, I think Ivey is overvalued and Sharpe is undervalued. If the Knicks could sneak up and take Sharpe, for me that’s like stealing the #1 pick.

I’d be willing to start fresh and build around Sharpe. I also think they would have to.