BRIGGS wrote:Carroll is worth it green is not

been saying that about carroll for a while now. carroll would be a perfect fit here and worth every cent of the money

BRIGGS wrote:Carroll is worth it green is not

green is the back up plan. id def rather have carroll for sure

BRIGGS wrote:Carroll is worth it green is not

Thekr value is pretty similar. Demare can slash a little better, Danny has more defensive range. I won't kill him for a subpar playoff series. What about last year when he killed the Heat?

nixluva wrote:Carroll is on my list as well. I have no problem with him as I've promoted him as a target. They are not separated by any significant amount but Green rates higher on my WS/48 list. The things some are knocking Green over are IMO overlooking Greens strengths in favor of minor weaknesses. I like both players and since Carroll actually plays as a SF I've been promoting Green.

Exactly, give me both and I'll be happy playing small ball with Melo at the 4. They would fit well with Russell or Towns but not so much if Okafor is the pick. If Melo is at the 4 I want a rim protector behind him.

BRIGGS wrote:If we are going to spend money on free agency my suggestion is to outbid everyone for Demmarre Carroll. Someone else said its a poor mans dray green with better offensive skills.

I like DeMaRRe Carroll a lot however, I like Draymond Green much more
Do I like Carroll at 12m, not really, but understand getting him at 6m isn't happening anymore
I just find it a little funny how some could value Carroll at 12m even willing to overpay for him, while saying Green isn't worth a max contract when his contract is about 2m more

He has raised his contract/value much higher this season and playoffs while JR Smith finds a way to lower his value once again after having another good season

BRIGGS wrote:If I had to point to one player who has been brutal for the Spurs--its Green. When he is off his 3 ball--its a scary deal.

His last 3 playoff games

6-24(25%) with 4 rebounds and 6 assists TOTAL in 30+ minutes per!! Name me one team that their SG plays like that in the playoffs and win games? Danny Green is a ROLE player and we are seeing the downside of that. We can find Danny Green in UDFA --is Danny Hilliard much different--same size--can hit the 3 ball at 40+% good build. Why would I spend 40mm$ on a role player who can get to the basket at a position where its near mandatory to get there?

I will agree with anyone who says we should pay up for D Carroll in fact if the Knicks give him 4 years 50 mm or even slightly higher it's a good deal he earned his way into it--unlike green car rolls game is diverse he can play 2-3-4 he's a solid rebounder defender and realistically his arsenal on offense is a higher tier than greens imho Carroll can avg 17-18 points and green can't.

To those who think you can't find another Danny green in the 2 nd round or ufda hell we just did his name is Langston Galloway and while he is not fully proven from what I have seen his value at 600 k compared to what a team will have to shell out to Green I can live with his bumps and bruises. The one big mistake the Knicks made with Galloway is not signing him to the rookie 3 year 4 mm contract and it will comeback to hurt us next year. No comparison Carroll equals great value and is a smart pick up green equals a value that won't be half as good. I don't like sg who don't take it to the basket and green does not. We don't have the offensive arsenal to support whether green is hot or cold from 3 we need diverse players with multi skill set. And for those who think defense is an overwhelming prognosticator of success to a point it over rides offensive skills you are not following basketball these teams need to get to 110 to win

BRIGGS wrote:this is a stupid argument.

I will agree with anyone who says we should pay up for D Carroll in fact if the Knicks give him 4 years 50 mm or even slightly higher it's a good deal he earned his way into it--unlike green car rolls game is diverse he can play 2-3-4 he's a solid rebounder defender and realistically his arsenal on offense is a higher tier than greens imho Carroll can avg 17-18 points and green can't.

To those who think you can't find another Danny green in the 2 nd round or ufda hell we just did his name is Langston Galloway and while he is not fully proven from what I have seen his value at 600 k compared to what a team will have to shell out to Green I can live with his bumps and bruises. The one big mistake the Knicks made with Galloway is not signing him to the rookie 3 year 4 mm contract and it will comeback to hurt us next year. No comparison Carroll equals great value and is a smart pick up green equals a value that won't be half as good. I don't like sg who don't take it to the basket and green does not. We don't have the offensive arsenal to support whether green is hot or cold from 3 we need diverse players with multi skill set. And for those who think defense is an overwhelming prognosticator of success to a point it over rides offensive skills you are not following basketball these teams need to get to 110 to win

I'm sorry, but if you think players like Danny Green are easily available everywhere, you are deluded. It's not just about skill set.

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:this is a stupid argument.

I will agree with anyone who says we should pay up for D Carroll in fact if the Knicks give him 4 years 50 mm or even slightly higher it's a good deal he earned his way into it--unlike green car rolls game is diverse he can play 2-3-4 he's a solid rebounder defender and realistically his arsenal on offense is a higher tier than greens imho Carroll can avg 17-18 points and green can't.

To those who think you can't find another Danny green in the 2 nd round or ufda hell we just did his name is Langston Galloway and while he is not fully proven from what I have seen his value at 600 k compared to what a team will have to shell out to Green I can live with his bumps and bruises. The one big mistake the Knicks made with Galloway is not signing him to the rookie 3 year 4 mm contract and it will comeback to hurt us next year. No comparison Carroll equals great value and is a smart pick up green equals a value that won't be half as good. I don't like sg who don't take it to the basket and green does not. We don't have the offensive arsenal to support whether green is hot or cold from 3 we need diverse players with multi skill set. And for those who think defense is an overwhelming prognosticator of success to a point it over rides offensive skills you are not following basketball these teams need to get to 110 to win

I'm sorry, but if you think players like Danny Green are easily available everywhere, you are deluded. It's not just about skill set.

You're right, it isnt skillset, it's the system. He looks good because of who he plays with. He's totally replaceable, and if he asks for too much the Spurs likely will.

Knicks city some of these guys have no clue( not breaking balls and I say this respectively towards other opinions)but Danny Green Is a product of the Spurs system on both ends and that any team paying big money will be surprised when he does not play as well for them You're dead on if green goes over 6 mm with the Spurs they will simply find another green. That s what they do

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:this is a stupid argument.

I will agree with anyone who says we should pay up for D Carroll in fact if the Knicks give him 4 years 50 mm or even slightly higher it's a good deal he earned his way into it--unlike green car rolls game is diverse he can play 2-3-4 he's a solid rebounder defender and realistically his arsenal on offense is a higher tier than greens imho Carroll can avg 17-18 points and green can't.

To those who think you can't find another Danny green in the 2 nd round or ufda hell we just did his name is Langston Galloway and while he is not fully proven from what I have seen his value at 600 k compared to what a team will have to shell out to Green I can live with his bumps and bruises. The one big mistake the Knicks made with Galloway is not signing him to the rookie 3 year 4 mm contract and it will comeback to hurt us next year. No comparison Carroll equals great value and is a smart pick up green equals a value that won't be half as good. I don't like sg who don't take it to the basket and green does not. We don't have the offensive arsenal to support whether green is hot or cold from 3 we need diverse players with multi skill set. And for those who think defense is an overwhelming prognosticator of success to a point it over rides offensive skills you are not following basketball these teams need to get to 110 to win

I'm sorry, but if you think players like Danny Green are easily available everywhere, you are deluded. It's not just about skill set.

You're right, it isnt skillset, it's the system. He looks good because of who he plays with. He's totally replaceable, and if he asks for too much the Spurs likely will.

Its not just the system- a player still has to execute