VDesai wrote:

DLeethal wrote:

VDesai wrote:

DLeethal wrote:The only way they trade Mikal is in a blockbuster - they will never get close to equal value for him so I doubt they cut ties. He’s still a guy who can contribute to winning and they are still a winning team. I would agree they need a better guy to guard the Halliburtons’s of the world. Wright guards him better than anyone we got.

Sunk cost. Not the right fit. Next move is to extend him. Cut bait.

I think that’s extreme. He’s a versatile guy who can fit many roles including 6th man. He doesn’t HAVE to be your starting 2 guard.

Nah he's been here 100 games and he plays a style that doesn't really mesh with the team. We want to create corner 3's - he can't make them. We want him to guard ballhandlers and he wants to give them two feet of space. He has almost zero chemistry with Brunson. We have to extend him where he will be here another 4 or decide he isn't the right guy...we can still move off him.

I really think if we had someone in the lineup that was a real 3 pt shooter or physical defender it would make quite a bit of difference. Mikal decides he wants to do it about a third of the time and then literally fades away the rest of the time. He can be a good player for someone, but he's not the right fit with this group.

Wasn't Mikal one of the best corner 3pt shooters in the NBA this season?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1861833539341164795

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

I both love Mitch and struggle with Mitch. What Mitch does well, he is ungoldly elite at; rebounding, defense, moving his feet, overall motor, interviews.

You can probably only play Mitch 25 minutes a game at most, with the risk of significant downtime but Knicks trainers would know best. In the deep playoffs, Mitch is almost a glorified situational player. That seems almost correct. He can be a wrecking ball in spurts or kill you as badly because of his limitations.

Mitch will never have better trade value than right after this season ends, for better or worse.

His contract goes down to $12m, he's not untouchable but I don't think we'd get back a player that can impact games the way Mitch does. And with KAT's defensive issues we need that backup.

I think I'd agree with some of what you are saying - Mitch's ceiling impact probably won't be reached in a trade - but there are players out there that could make an overall impact that makes the team better across the board but maybe not just as overtly as we can see what Mitch does.

I keep on harping on Herb Jones type player. He is that type of dude to make the rotation guys better, same'ish contract as Mitch with an additional year (which is HUGE). You would need to pair that move with another to acquire a serviceable big.

nycericanguy wrote:

VDesai wrote:

DLeethal wrote:

VDesai wrote:

DLeethal wrote:The only way they trade Mikal is in a blockbuster - they will never get close to equal value for him so I doubt they cut ties. He’s still a guy who can contribute to winning and they are still a winning team. I would agree they need a better guy to guard the Halliburtons’s of the world. Wright guards him better than anyone we got.

Sunk cost. Not the right fit. Next move is to extend him. Cut bait.

I think that’s extreme. He’s a versatile guy who can fit many roles including 6th man. He doesn’t HAVE to be your starting 2 guard.

Nah he's been here 100 games and he plays a style that doesn't really mesh with the team. We want to create corner 3's - he can't make them. We want him to guard ballhandlers and he wants to give them two feet of space. He has almost zero chemistry with Brunson. We have to extend him where he will be here another 4 or decide he isn't the right guy...we can still move off him.

I really think if we had someone in the lineup that was a real 3 pt shooter or physical defender it would make quite a bit of difference. Mikal decides he wants to do it about a third of the time and then literally fades away the rest of the time. He can be a good player for someone, but he's not the right fit with this group.

Wasn't Mikal one of the best corner 3pt shooters in the NBA this season?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1861833539341164795

Tweet weirdly dated November 2024? If memory serves Beasley was over 50% from corner this season and I thought I saw a stat saying hiis numbers had really declined from the corner vs. what he shot early in his career. The issue is that Kal is the volume 3 pt shooter in the lineup and he only shot 35% regular season and 34% in the playoffs. He was obviously god-like on mid-range fadeaways, but within the context of the team and starting lineup, that's not the role that has been carved out.

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

Soon to be 39yo Horford? Who by this time next year will be 40?

We need a guy like him, yes, but not him! We need a guy that can play starters minutes because he has to balance Brunson’s act.

i mean he still played almost 30mpg on the defending champs and started mostly.

For 15-20mpg he can still be a very solid piece. You need those high IQ vets. He's a suped up version of Taj Gibson and Taj was huge for us at times with his defense and IQ.

As a piece on the bench, I’m in. But I think we would be better served looking for a starting center because, especially if we don’t change our coach, the bench won’t be used as much as we hope. We need a guy that can play 30-35mins and be the defensive anchor to clean up the team’s messes. We also don’t have many assets remaining, so if you are trading important pieces, get the one you need the most in return.

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

Soon to be 39yo Horford? Who by this time next year will be 40?

We need a guy like him, yes, but not him! We need a guy that can play starters minutes because he has to balance Brunson’s act.

i mean he still played almost 30mpg on the defending champs and started mostly.

For 15-20mpg he can still be a very solid piece. You need those high IQ vets. He's a suped up version of Taj Gibson and Taj was huge for us at times with his defense and IQ.

As a piece on the bench, I’m in. But I think we would be better served looking for a starting center because, especially if we don’t change our coach, the bench won’t be used as much as we hope. We need a guy that can play 30-35mins and be the defensive anchor to clean up the team’s messes. We also don’t have many assets remaining, so if you are trading important pieces, get the one you need the most in return.

Al is a FA. we have a very talented team, but we could use a gritty, defensive, high IQ glue guy right now.

Knicksfan wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

I both love Mitch and struggle with Mitch. What Mitch does well, he is ungoldly elite at; rebounding, defense, moving his feet, overall motor, interviews.

You can probably only play Mitch 25 minutes a game at most, with the risk of significant downtime but Knicks trainers would know best. In the deep playoffs, Mitch is almost a glorified situational player. That seems almost correct. He can be a wrecking ball in spurts or kill you as badly because of his limitations.

Mitch will never have better trade value than right after this season ends, for better or worse.

That’s why I think the main issue right now is a starting center that can bring what iHart did for us as the main starter. If Thibs remains the coach, we need a starting center that can play long enough and justify leaving Josh Hart on the bench too.

Honestly a guy like Al can start next to KAT and fits beautifully. While also not needing starter minutes. There's no room for another 30-35mpg C unless you're trading KAT

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

I both love Mitch and struggle with Mitch. What Mitch does well, he is ungoldly elite at; rebounding, defense, moving his feet, overall motor, interviews.

You can probably only play Mitch 25 minutes a game at most, with the risk of significant downtime but Knicks trainers would know best. In the deep playoffs, Mitch is almost a glorified situational player. That seems almost correct. He can be a wrecking ball in spurts or kill you as badly because of his limitations.

Mitch will never have better trade value than right after this season ends, for better or worse.

His contract goes down to $12m, he's not untouchable but I don't think we'd get back a player that can impact games the way Mitch does. And with KAT's defensive issues we need that backup.

I think I'd agree with some of what you are saying - Mitch's ceiling impact probably won't be reached in a trade - but there are players out there that could make an overall impact that makes the team better across the board but maybe not just as overly as we can see what Mitch does.

I keep on harping on Herb Jones type player. He is that type of dude to make the rotation guys better, same'ish contract as Mitch with an additional year (which is HUGE). You would need to pair that move with another to acquire a serviceable big.

I cant see NOLA moving Jones for Mitch.

Think of it in reverse, it's not so much of moving Jones as acquiring Mitch and what he represents. Couple of things NOP need to convince themselves of: Do they want to or need to make the playoffs/play-in or put together a very competitive team? Are they making a commitment to winning and showing off and growing Zion (if that is even possible). Joe Dumars doesn't have to make a splash but he does have to show progress in a significant way above and beyond whatever trash they have been rolling out over the past years. All of this is a big assumption.

Hopefully Dumars can be convinced on Mitch's defense and intensity he brings and has shown in this playoffs, cause that's what his young team needs. Defense up the middle to protect Zion and Trey Murphy. Mitch could be a very very good mentor to Missi too, cause that guy is decent but not impactful enough to make strides on overall defense.

Dejounte out with Achilles until probably January.

NOP have a ton of decent SG's. Their hypothetical lineup next season would be Missi, Zion, Trey, McCullum, Dejounte. Hawkins, Alvarado, Antonio Reeves, Herb, Karlo Matković, Olynyk. I think NOP are high on both Hawkins and Reeve as SG's but I am not 100% sure. They have pick #7. Herb Jones is a wing. He is definitely behind Zion and Trey in the pecking order but could probably start at SG.... where they have 2 guys in Hawking and Reeves taking minutes, not to mention McCullum.

To me, Deuce and Mitch would add a lot of experience and defense to surround Zion and make their rotation make sense long term. But for the Dejounte injury downtime, I don't know where Herb Jones fits unless you also move McCullum, which they probably will try to do.

To me, you sell the idea of Mitch, Deuce to Dumars. Mature vets with playoff experience is your sell. Knicks would need to obviously compliment that type of move with additional C's, I'm of the opinion that Herb and others on Knicks not used bench will be enough to replace Deuce. Knicks would obviously need back more than just Herb.

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

We are definitely not there with IND and Game 1 wasn’t an aberration, but a confirmation of a huge issue this team has had all year long.

This team does need a defensive starting center, but not Horford. I wish we could’ve undone the Mikal trade, because those picks could’ve given us a real difference maker at C like Kessler.

Going into last nights game there was a 2 point difference, yes we are right there and this series should easily be 2-2.

Yes it sucks right now, but you cant be irrational and emotional. We didn't close out game 1, but IND also hit a ton of lucky shots to win that game. Nesmith literally went 6-6 from 3 in about 3 minutes, that NEVER Happens, Hali got an incredibly lucky bounce at the end also.

it happened and its a loss, but lets not act like IND is blowing us out of the water either.

Hey, same argument could be made about the Boston series, where we could’ve veeeeery easily been 0-2 instead of 2-0. We only won one game in convincing fashion, but the rest were comeback wins.

I wish I was only irrational and emotional about this team right now. Irrational I’ve been in times when I’ve thought they are really close to winning the championship. Truth is, we have talented pieces, so yeah, the makeover might not be as dramatic, but it would be the wrong conclusion to think that this team is one minor piece away.

A defensive starting center is a must. A sharpshooter off the bench is also a need. A reliable backup PG too. That at first glance. But as many have wondered here and in other posts, the fit of Mikal is in question. Add to that, OG can’t be fully trusted. He is probably one of the most talented but inconsistent players I’ve seen and even if you consider that he might or not be injured, he still can’t be depended on.

This roster, as I’ve described since the beginning, is a beautiful mess. Talented enough to win a bunch of games on that strength, but messy enough to never get to the promised land. And while I know it’s easy to simply question the coaching, the truth is that throughout the year, our weaknesses have been mostly self-inflicted: poor focus, inconsistent defense, counterproductive varying offense, questionable effort, lack of identity from game to game, etc. I have a feeling that with a different voice and a different approach to the roster, things could improve. But who knows…

coming back on the road from down 20 takes a concerted effort. It happens quite often. We weren't hitting crazy wild shots.

IND coming back from 14 with 2 minutes was just wild fluky 3's, some from close to 28 feet out. It's something that literally NEVER happened before. That was definitely much more fluky.

Coming back from 20pt deficits means you dug yourself that hole in the first place. That speaks of a very undisciplined team. The comebacks obviously were very good efforts, but to constantly play that poorly speaks of significant defensive issues and in the direction of the offense.

IND’s comeback in 2 minutes screams of that as well. From their side, yes, they were on a mission to shoot enough 3’s in as little time as possible to have a chance to win. True. But from the Knicks side, not being able to sustain the lead, knowing very clearly what Indiana was doing, is just another of the many, MANY times this team has looked like they have no idea what they are doing.

We aren’t down 3-1 because Indiana got lucky. One team has played with consistency, poise, ferocity and strong effort and they are the ones about to move on. While it may give the impression that we are at their same level, the truth is that we have shown all of those weaknesses since the beginning.

This team has too many question marks: Brunson’s passing and defense, KAT’s defense and IQ, Mikal’s consistency and strength, OG’s consistency and health, Hart’s defense and focus. Them together as a lineup have been historically awful defensively. Might just be one piece, but a significant change is needed.

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

I both love Mitch and struggle with Mitch. What Mitch does well, he is ungoldly elite at; rebounding, defense, moving his feet, overall motor, interviews.

You can probably only play Mitch 25 minutes a game at most, with the risk of significant downtime but Knicks trainers would know best. In the deep playoffs, Mitch is almost a glorified situational player. That seems almost correct. He can be a wrecking ball in spurts or kill you as badly because of his limitations.

Mitch will never have better trade value than right after this season ends, for better or worse.

That’s why I think the main issue right now is a starting center that can bring what iHart did for us as the main starter. If Thibs remains the coach, we need a starting center that can play long enough and justify leaving Josh Hart on the bench too.

Honestly a guy like Al can start next to KAT and fits beautifully. While also not needing starter minutes. There's no room for another 30-35mpg C unless you're trading KAT

Al is gonna be 40 around this time next season! It would be foolish to have him as your improvement from this season. No, this team isn’t that close because the starting lineup is a defensive atrocity as currently constructed. Yes, there is space for a 30-35mpg center because KAT would move to PF in that situation and Hart would be coming off the bench in the same situation. That wouldn’t just help KAT, but also OG and Mikal who would move into better fitting positions.

A younger Horford would be awesome, but that’s not the case. He’s had injury issues and Boston has dealt with him very carefully. We already have OG and Mitch as injury issues.

Knicksfan wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

I both love Mitch and struggle with Mitch. What Mitch does well, he is ungoldly elite at; rebounding, defense, moving his feet, overall motor, interviews.

You can probably only play Mitch 25 minutes a game at most, with the risk of significant downtime but Knicks trainers would know best. In the deep playoffs, Mitch is almost a glorified situational player. That seems almost correct. He can be a wrecking ball in spurts or kill you as badly because of his limitations.

Mitch will never have better trade value than right after this season ends, for better or worse.

That’s why I think the main issue right now is a starting center that can bring what iHart did for us as the main starter. If Thibs remains the coach, we need a starting center that can play long enough and justify leaving Josh Hart on the bench too.

For me, the Josh Hart minutes are a sideshow thing. Knicks are a flawed, new team and Josh is in that space of both having to fill in for those flaws and part of the flaws themselves because he has to fill in so much and is a flawed player. I'm projecting a bit but think those things figure themselves out over time.

Can you win with KAT and Brunson and their obvious deficiencies? If you think you can, how do you get there. If you that's too much poor defense and too giant of a hill to climb offensively, what can you get for KAT that makes sense.

That's the bottom line for me.

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we dont need any desperation moves, we beat BOS which is what we were built to do, and BOS will only be weaker going forward. We are right there with IND, if only for that game 1.

I think just signing a guy like Hortford, along with more chemistry and growth from guys like Huk would go a long way.

If the Knicks could solidify Horford, I'd guess they would try to move Mitch for a PoA guy?

no way, Mitch is a big part of this team. Hortford could be a great glue guy for 20mpg and can play next to KAT or Mitch.

Soon to be 39yo Horford? Who by this time next year will be 40?

We need a guy like him, yes, but not him! We need a guy that can play starters minutes because he has to balance Brunson’s act.

i mean he still played almost 30mpg on the defending champs and started mostly.

For 15-20mpg he can still be a very solid piece. You need those high IQ vets. He's a suped up version of Taj Gibson and Taj was huge for us at times with his defense and IQ.

As a piece on the bench, I’m in. But I think we would be better served looking for a starting center because, especially if we don’t change our coach, the bench won’t be used as much as we hope. We need a guy that can play 30-35mins and be the defensive anchor to clean up the team’s messes. We also don’t have many assets remaining, so if you are trading important pieces, get the one you need the most in return.

Al is a FA. we have a very talented team, but we could use a gritty, defensive, high IQ glue guy right now.

If we are just going to try and add IQ and moves around the margins I like Al and I like CP3. We are trying to win a championship next year, there is absolutely nothing wrong with going after 1-2 year veterans at this stage. All contenders seek those types out. We still have young guys developing on the bench but they might not be ready next year.