TPercy wrote:Dragic will suck in the triangle, he plays fast dynamic basketball and like holfresh says is a ball dominant pg which is the opposite of what Phil would want. Unless we ditch the triangle or tailor it, no chance of Phil trying to get him. I want him here a lot, he was very entertaining to watch and played a big part in phx successful season. I was very pissed when he was not an all star last year.

I've been against getting a guy like Dragic in the triangle for the reasons you state. But Dragic or any driving and distributing PG can still be a very valuable asset in the triangle. They, or a capable SG, can bring the ball up the court and initiate the offense (which in the triangle isn't much). But once that ball gets moving that is where a guy like Dragic or Jackson can be valuable, as they can drive, disrupt and distribute. I really want a VERY strong defender at PG though, not sure about those guys. Galloway is actually looking very good.

holfresh wrote:Phil will spend money on a guy who can play the post or another wing player who handles the ball like Pippen..PG max players need not apply..

We have something like 35-37mm $ to spend. First off I agree that we should be "careful" in how we allocate funds and I would like to have a max contract ready for Kevin Durant without having to pay to get rid of salary.

I think what Dragic brings--lets say 4 years 58mm(14.5mm) is incredible stability an ability to score 20-22 points while shooting 50% a good passer capable of 7-8 assists per game and good rebounding and good team defensive player with size. He can play both 1 and 2 which is kind of what we want. He can hit the three hes a great penetration hes in his prime years hes a winner reliable health wise and seems like a good guy.

If we spend 25mm $ this offseason on longer term contracts and keep roughly 10mm open in one year contracts--that gives us a max contract for 2016.

Lets say we give 15mm to Dragic and 4mm to our upper draft pick. That gives us 6-7mm in longer term money and 9-10 in shorter term cash.(1 yr) Shorter tem means players who make under 2mm who can easily be moved or 1 yr contracts. Im assuming that Jose will either be traded or waived and stretched.

holfresh wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

holfresh wrote:Phil will spend money on a guy who can play the post or another wing player who handles the ball like Pippen..PG max players need not apply..

We have something like 35-37mm $ to spend. First off I agree that we should be "careful" in how we allocate funds and I would like to have a max contract ready for Kevin Durant without having to pay to get rid of salary.

I think what Dragic brings--lets say 4 years 58mm(14.5mm) is incredible stability an ability to score 20-22 points while shooting 50% a good passer capable of 7-8 assists per game and good rebounding and good team defensive player with size. He can play both 1 and 2 which is kind of what we want. He can hit the three hes a great penetration hes in his prime years hes a winner reliable health wise and seems like a good guy.

If we spend 25mm $ this offseason on longer term contracts and keep roughly 10mm open in one year contracts--that gives us a max contract for 2016.

Lets say we give 15mm to Dragic and 4mm to our upper draft pick. That gives us 6-7mm in longer term money and 9-10 in shorter term cash.(1 yr) Shorter tem means players who make under 2mm who can easily be moved or 1 yr contracts. Im assuming that Jose will either be traded or waived and stretched.

Outside the fact that he isn't worth the money you are willing to offer..Phil said no to Lowry who is better..

1- Kawaii Leanard/Butler (the unlikely but limits teams in improvement)

2- Draymond Green (possible with GS's payroll)

(possible if we are able to move CA's contract and collect the talent needed to play with them)

Millsap
Dragic

If we are able to move CA's contract, I would then grab a bunch of players from 2-5m that would FIT the philosophy of how GS/Atlanta plays
And would make us a GREAT DEFENSIVE TEAM everynight

this is my order, if we are going to throw all our eggs on our couple of players, and I MUST be able to get the full MLE and use it on 2 players with Cole Aldrich's contract
I would love Dragic, but convincing him to come to NY without talent would be impossible
Unless we are able to move CA and possibly even Calderon's (moving Calderon is not enough, in order to get CA I must be able to add 2 players above him for their defensive abilities/understanding/abilities to effect the overall production of the team

#1 pick of 2015
Development of Thanasis

smackeddog wrote:I like Dragic, but I wonder if Patrick Beverley is the better fit for the triangle- defense and threes, pretty much like Ron Harper. Maybe Dragic at SG, but I worry about him becomning like Calderon in three years

Yea I can see Beverly. Won't cost as much as Knight

fishmike wrote:

TPercy wrote:Dragic will suck in the triangle, he plays fast dynamic basketball and like holfresh says is a ball dominant pg which is the opposite of what Phil would want. Unless we ditch the triangle or tailor it, no chance of Phil trying to get him. I want him here a lot, he was very entertaining to watch and played a big part in phx successful season. I was very pissed when he was not an all star last year.

what is it about the triangle that isnt suited for Dragic?

I think people look at the PGs of Phil's title teams and assume thats the mold. Those teams had superstar SGs who didnt need dynamic floor generals. Because they facilitated so much (both Kobe are MJ are 5+ assist guys) what did they need at PG? A guy who could defend and shoot. Thats just BB, not so much triangle. If you have MJ and Kobe why would you have a PG that dominates the ball?

Sorry it may be my lack of comprehension but what is the main point of what you are trying to say (Not insulting you or anything just don't understand.)

TPercy wrote:

fishmike wrote:

TPercy wrote:Dragic will suck in the triangle, he plays fast dynamic basketball and like holfresh says is a ball dominant pg which is the opposite of what Phil would want. Unless we ditch the triangle or tailor it, no chance of Phil trying to get him. I want him here a lot, he was very entertaining to watch and played a big part in phx successful season. I was very pissed when he was not an all star last year.

what is it about the triangle that isnt suited for Dragic?

I think people look at the PGs of Phil's title teams and assume thats the mold. Those teams had superstar SGs who didnt need dynamic floor generals. Because they facilitated so much (both Kobe are MJ are 5+ assist guys) what did they need at PG? A guy who could defend and shoot. Thats just BB, not so much triangle. If you have MJ and Kobe why would you have a PG that dominates the ball?

Sorry it may be my lack of comprehension but what is the main point of what you are trying to say (Not insulting you or anything just don't understand.)

no he is generally incoherent and gobbledy-gooky. it's a quasi-effective way of masking a lack of understanding of the nuances of building a winner.

what he doesn't seem to understand is money, talent, and skills squandered in a specific context... or overpaying.

holfresh wrote:Wow..Two consecutive post with no mention of U know who..

well i am addressing what it will take for the knicks to become an actual winning team, ie making it to the conference finals and beyond. that will require making u know who something of an afterthought since he's only breathed that rarified air once in 12 years, and probably 14 years unless the knicks defy the odds and become incredibly lucky.

you need a core-- starting caliber-- that is comprised of two-way players.

i like travis wear, who is a two-way player... but not starting caliber. maybe cleanthony early and thanasis are in the same boat, and that's an okay start.

as to beverley, he is a borderline starter who happens to be a two-way player. worthwhile acquiring in my book, and i repeat a better value here in new york than dragic, although in a vacuum i think dragic is terrific and a better basketball player than patrick beverley.

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:Wow..Two consecutive post with no mention of U know who..

well i am addressing what it will take for the knicks to become an actual winning team, ie making it to the conference finals and beyond. that will require making u know who something of an afterthought since he's only breathed that rarified air once in 12 years, and probably 14 years unless the knicks defy the odds and become incredibly lucky.

you need a core-- starting caliber-- that is comprised of two-way players.

i like travis wear, who is a two-way player... but not starting caliber. maybe cleanthony early and thanasis are in the same boat, and that's an okay start.

as to beverley, he is a borderline starter who happens to be a two-way player. worthwhile acquiring in my book, and i repeat a better value here in new york than dragic, although in a vacuum i think dragic is terrific and a better basketball player than patrick beverley.

Dragic is a two way player?

no, he is not. when i use the qualifier "in a vacuum" i guess that was not conveyed. but in this specific context beverley is the better FIT even if i think dragic is the better player overall.

and what i mean by overall is that dragic is more of a positive-sum player in most situations than beverley. that is, he provides more offense for himself and others than he gives up on defense.

that said, money would be wasted on dragic because his skills would be squandered here in new york, whereas, again, all of beverley's skills would be fully exploited. he's a better return on investment and that is what you want when trying to build a contender.