BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:I am against DeRozan. His 7 assists are a result of him playing for a coach who has an offensive system with sets that require passes. It's Pops. Derozan coming here to drive and kick out might not take full advantage of his passing. And that's the best case scenario. And he would take that job from Randle, who is just as good at it. Why? Because if Randle drives and kicks it to Derozan that doesn't do anything. Because DeRozan doesn't shoot from 3 and would need to get to the paint. The paint would be occupied by Randle. So he would only have the mid range. Which is from the basketball of yesteryear. Nowadays the metrics require players to take the 3 or shoot under the basket.
Now let's see if we can work it the other way. Derozan drives and kicks it to Randle who is lights out from the 3. Great. We just effectively downgraded Randle to the Steve Novak role. Not good.

I find all of this not right.

Derozan adds another aspect to the team that it does not have: a very competent slasher who also passes a LOT. He also adds a quality scorer night in and night out. DeRozen does not have to be the last big piece but he does have to come at a cost that meets his output.

DeRozen is a MUCH better facilitator than Randle. 7 assists to 2 TO's versus 6 and 3.5.

DeRozen is doing this with only 1 real above average 3pt shooter on the Spurs in Rudy Gay. Rudy does not start and I have zero clue how much time they share on the court. Let me say that again: DeRozen is a killer in the mid range and rim and he has zero spacing around him on the Spurs compared to what the Knicks could surround him with.

DeRozen sucks at shooting 3 point shots. He is not the perfect add.

Facilitating FOR Randle and RJ may be better then for both of those guys. Feel like we have an inkling of that with Rose but not all the way.

Feel like the Knicks are turning into a passing team ala Spurs, this must continue.

Also, you sign him to a digestible contract, and then he can be repackaged.

Would I rather have a Lonzo than DeRozen all things being equal? Sure but let's not turn away from all the options, and DeRozen would be a very one.

I just don't see a smooth fit with DeRozan. He's been a PF for them and his defensive is bad. Right off the bat I'm trying to figure out where DeMar fits outside off a super sixth man role. And he'll be about 33 if the Knicks sign him. And he has a history of playoff failures. Miami had similar concerns when they signed Butler, but they didn't already have an alpha like Randle on their roster. I agree DeMar is a talent, but I'm hesitant to sign a star just so the Knicks can say they made a splash. I'd say stay patient. Eventually a guy like Lilliard, who fits the roster way better, is going to force his way out.

DeRozen is a SF, he is listed at PF cause of the roster the Spurs currently have and I'd have to guess they are just doing patch work.

PG, RJ, DeRozen, Randle, C.

Knicks HAVE to use their cap space this year to maximize it. You need to sign a player and then also maximize his output so you can make a trade for a dude like Lilliard.

No idea if DeRozen is that guy - and certainly his age is a big factor.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:I am against DeRozan. His 7 assists are a result of him playing for a coach who has an offensive system with sets that require passes. It's Pops. Derozan coming here to drive and kick out might not take full advantage of his passing. And that's the best case scenario. And he would take that job from Randle, who is just as good at it. Why? Because if Randle drives and kicks it to Derozan that doesn't do anything. Because DeRozan doesn't shoot from 3 and would need to get to the paint. The paint would be occupied by Randle. So he would only have the mid range. Which is from the basketball of yesteryear. Nowadays the metrics require players to take the 3 or shoot under the basket.
Now let's see if we can work it the other way. Derozan drives and kicks it to Randle who is lights out from the 3. Great. We just effectively downgraded Randle to the Steve Novak role. Not good.

I find all of this not right.

Derozan adds another aspect to the team that it does not have: a very competent slasher who also passes a LOT. He also adds a quality scorer night in and night out. DeRozen does not have to be the last big piece but he does have to come at a cost that meets his output.

DeRozen is a MUCH better facilitator than Randle. 7 assists to 2 TO's versus 6 and 3.5.

DeRozen is doing this with only 1 real above average 3pt shooter on the Spurs in Rudy Gay. Rudy does not start and I have zero clue how much time they share on the court. Let me say that again: DeRozen is a killer in the mid range and rim and he has zero spacing around him on the Spurs compared to what the Knicks could surround him with.

DeRozen sucks at shooting 3 point shots. He is not the perfect add.

Facilitating FOR Randle and RJ may be better then for both of those guys. Feel like we have an inkling of that with Rose but not all the way.

Feel like the Knicks are turning into a passing team ala Spurs, this must continue.

Also, you sign him to a digestible contract, and then he can be repackaged.

Would I rather have a Lonzo than DeRozen all things being equal? Sure but let's not turn away from all the options, and DeRozen would be a very one.

I just don't see a smooth fit with DeRozan. He's been a PF for them and his defensive is bad. Right off the bat I'm trying to figure out where DeMar fits outside off a super sixth man role. And he'll be about 33 if the Knicks sign him. And he has a history of playoff failures. Miami had similar concerns when they signed Butler, but they didn't already have an alpha like Randle on their roster. I agree DeMar is a talent, but I'm hesitant to sign a star just so the Knicks can say they made a splash. I'd say stay patient. Eventually a guy like Lilliard, who fits the roster way better, is going to force his way out.

DeRozen is a SF, he is listed at PF cause of the roster the Spurs currently have and I'd have to guess they are just doing patch work.

PG, RJ, DeRozen, Randle, C.

Knicks HAVE to use their cap space this year to maximize it. You need to sign a player and then also maximize his output so you can make a trade for a dude like Lilliard.

No idea if DeRozen is that guy - and certainly his age is a big factor.

Ok, even if use the space on a wing, whats the chance an aging combo-forward on a newly signed contract is going to be an enticing enough for a team to make that trade? I mean, it could happen, but it's not likely. The stakes are a bit too rich for my blood.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:I am against DeRozan. His 7 assists are a result of him playing for a coach who has an offensive system with sets that require passes. It's Pops. Derozan coming here to drive and kick out might not take full advantage of his passing. And that's the best case scenario. And he would take that job from Randle, who is just as good at it. Why? Because if Randle drives and kicks it to Derozan that doesn't do anything. Because DeRozan doesn't shoot from 3 and would need to get to the paint. The paint would be occupied by Randle. So he would only have the mid range. Which is from the basketball of yesteryear. Nowadays the metrics require players to take the 3 or shoot under the basket.
Now let's see if we can work it the other way. Derozan drives and kicks it to Randle who is lights out from the 3. Great. We just effectively downgraded Randle to the Steve Novak role. Not good.

I find all of this not right.

Derozan adds another aspect to the team that it does not have: a very competent slasher who also passes a LOT. He also adds a quality scorer night in and night out. DeRozen does not have to be the last big piece but he does have to come at a cost that meets his output.

DeRozen is a MUCH better facilitator than Randle. 7 assists to 2 TO's versus 6 and 3.5.

DeRozen is doing this with only 1 real above average 3pt shooter on the Spurs in Rudy Gay. Rudy does not start and I have zero clue how much time they share on the court. Let me say that again: DeRozen is a killer in the mid range and rim and he has zero spacing around him on the Spurs compared to what the Knicks could surround him with.

DeRozen sucks at shooting 3 point shots. He is not the perfect add.

Facilitating FOR Randle and RJ may be better then for both of those guys. Feel like we have an inkling of that with Rose but not all the way.

Feel like the Knicks are turning into a passing team ala Spurs, this must continue.

Also, you sign him to a digestible contract, and then he can be repackaged.

Would I rather have a Lonzo than DeRozen all things being equal? Sure but let's not turn away from all the options, and DeRozen would be a very one.

I just don't see a smooth fit with DeRozan. He's been a PF for them and his defensive is bad. Right off the bat I'm trying to figure out where DeMar fits outside off a super sixth man role. And he'll be about 33 if the Knicks sign him. And he has a history of playoff failures. Miami had similar concerns when they signed Butler, but they didn't already have an alpha like Randle on their roster. I agree DeMar is a talent, but I'm hesitant to sign a star just so the Knicks can say they made a splash. I'd say stay patient. Eventually a guy like Lilliard, who fits the roster way better, is going to force his way out.

DeRozen is a SF, he is listed at PF cause of the roster the Spurs currently have and I'd have to guess they are just doing patch work.

PG, RJ, DeRozen, Randle, C.

Knicks HAVE to use their cap space this year to maximize it. You need to sign a player and then also maximize his output so you can make a trade for a dude like Lilliard.

No idea if DeRozen is that guy - and certainly his age is a big factor.

Still not a fan of DeRozan's fit here. Randle and Barrett's shooting improvements make it easier, but replacing Bullock with DeRozan is really taking a hit to the starting line-up with 3pt shooting and defense, and asking Randle and Barrett to adjust their games slightly. Just to sure if replacing Bullock with a scorer that struggles as a shooter and defender makes a lot of sense for this team.

I agree though, there's a limited amount of time to use cap space and maximize it.

Chandler wrote:Is Anthony Davis an option

Lebron is obnoxious, getting old, and breaking down. Time for him to join a real team.

totally not getting Demar at this point

principle about this year makes sense, and I'm sure it has not escaped FO

we are in a very unusual position where all of a sudden we have a bunch of guys we like, and even some guys who we like are riding a lot of pine, and we have almost 3 first rounders next year.

i can just as easily see a major trade as i could a major FA signing

i love Burks and Bullock, but let's also be honest. They didn't all of a sudden get good. Instead the CS has found a way to put those guys in a position to succeed. I'd like to think they have the ability to do that with others too. Taj and Rose are different players too. Not happy about losing any of those guys but just saying to reinforce there is a CS aspect too, to their success and we could dip into that again if needed.

martin wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:totally fool hardy and fools gold. The formula is ride RJ/Randle, protect the rim and lean on your depth. I love guys like Bullock/Burks but the simple truth is those players are easy to acquire and if the roster is loaded with high end talent they will be even easier, because low tier veteran FAs will be happy to come and play here.

Noel is the only Knick FA that is really critical to sign. The other guys are NOT AS GOOD as Conley/Powell/Derozon/Schroder and you would be stupid to waste an opportunity like $60-$70mm whatever in cap space to bring back inferior players than whats currently on the market

Makes ZERO sense.

Think chemistry and familiarity trump just being able to replace key pieces. The fact is Bullock has been exceptional defensively and has accepted his role on the team. As has Burks. Something that is not easy to predict or find. Can't underestimate the importance of not only adding vets that one thinks would fit a team and system but keeping the ones that actually do. For me, it is absolutely crucial that we finally stick with the pieces that are working. We have been the turnstile of the NBA the last few years and our record has reflected that. The theory behind these one-year deals was to find out which vets fit. Well, these guys fit. Why go after replacements that we do not know will buy in, fit in or work well together, when we already have ones that do. I also think that Burks is one of those fringe guys that are on the brink of next-level stuff.

IF we look at what we all wanted at the beginning of the year, it was more 3pt shooting, good defense and a solid PG. Knicks have shown they are now a very good 3pt shooting team(4th in the NBA and almost 2nd if not for small clicks). They have Rose who is playing exceptional basketball at PG spot and a top-ranked defense. Think its reason enough to make keeping the core roster together a priority. Sure, if we can add a decent PG and another shooter like Powell, I am all in. But again, think this is a roster that you just trim some fat ( Frank, Knox, Pinson, Pelle, and Payton), add a draft asset, and a couple of value FA's to an already well put together core.

I think there is something to be said about chemistry and familiarity and building on what you have accomplished but let's also be very explicit: IQ, Rose, Burks, Noel are players who didn't need the previous year's familiarity to get to the point where the Knicks are today. And I really don't know how the chemistry of RJ, Payton, Mitch, Julius, Taj really carried over from last year.

I think there will be some carry over from this year to next - Rose, Taj - are vet min shoe in's. I'm there with Fish on Noel being a priority with Mitch.

I'm also with Fish in the you NEED to maximize the cap space this year especially with Mitch, Julius in looming extension modes.

It's nice to say we want to bring back Burks but there are just higher talent guys out there that would do the same or much more than him.

Bullock has the Early Bird rights attached to him, so I can see the Knicks going over the cap and then signing him; the others, not so much. Noel maybe with the MLE?

Good descriptor of what Bird rights are and how much we can sign each player for: https://www.nba.com/news/free-agency-explained

Agree that chemistry does not need multiple years to be created. Point was that the best gauge for chemistry and fit is how a team performs. Ie Wins. And clearly, this is our best team since 2012. So why mess with it? Makes sense that Key pieces should be resigned. Burks was a key piece off the bench. Bullock has been a key piece in the starting line up. Rose has been key as closing PG. Noel has been good on defense. As mentioned, IF we can add a key FA , I am all in. But who? And for how much? Also, do they add more value than the guys who have been successful.

Would also disagree about Noel. Love him but I think a defensive Center who can be a blue-collar guy is much easier to find than a guy like Burks who is a versatile wing and has great range and is shooting 41% from the three-point line. He is also a candidate for a big last-second bucket. Not to mention he fits well with Randle and RJ. I mean would you rather pay big money for Derozan? Just do not think he fits well with those two. IMO

For me, keeping these guys is absolutely a priority. There is the danger of what we Knick fans do. Underestimate our own and overestimate old names. ie. Conley, Derozan etc. Sticking with the same thinking as last year when I was one of a few who thought Randle was a solid player. We need to stick with what is working and with the players that are showing they have potential to reach another level. Rather just add another draft winner like IQ and a fringe FA PG that is not overpriced and overaged. Do not think anyone is talking about Leonard or another superstar. We have seen that tune before and know where that will end.

martin wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:I am against DeRozan. His 7 assists are a result of him playing for a coach who has an offensive system with sets that require passes. It's Pops. Derozan coming here to drive and kick out might not take full advantage of his passing. And that's the best case scenario. And he would take that job from Randle, who is just as good at it. Why? Because if Randle drives and kicks it to Derozan that doesn't do anything. Because DeRozan doesn't shoot from 3 and would need to get to the paint. The paint would be occupied by Randle. So he would only have the mid range. Which is from the basketball of yesteryear. Nowadays the metrics require players to take the 3 or shoot under the basket.
Now let's see if we can work it the other way. Derozan drives and kicks it to Randle who is lights out from the 3. Great. We just effectively downgraded Randle to the Steve Novak role. Not good.

I find all of this not right.

Derozan adds another aspect to the team that it does not have: a very competent slasher who also passes a LOT. He also adds a quality scorer night in and night out. DeRozen does not have to be the last big piece but he does have to come at a cost that meets his output.

DeRozen is a MUCH better facilitator than Randle. 7 assists to 2 TO's versus 6 and 3.5.

DeRozen is doing this with only 1 real above average 3pt shooter on the Spurs in Rudy Gay. Rudy does not start and I have zero clue how much time they share on the court. Let me say that again: DeRozen is a killer in the mid range and rim and he has zero spacing around him on the Spurs compared to what the Knicks could surround him with.

DeRozen sucks at shooting 3 point shots. He is not the perfect add.

Facilitating FOR Randle and RJ may be better then for both of those guys. Feel like we have an inkling of that with Rose but not all the way.

Feel like the Knicks are turning into a passing team ala Spurs, this must continue.

Also, you sign him to a digestible contract, and then he can be repackaged.

Would I rather have a Lonzo than DeRozen all things being equal? Sure but let's not turn away from all the options, and DeRozen would be a very one.

What are your thoughts on Derozan's defense?

BigDaddyG wrote:

Chandler wrote:Is Anthony Davis an option

Lebron is obnoxious, getting old, and breaking down. Time for him to join a real team.

totally not getting Demar at this point

principle about this year makes sense, and I'm sure it has not escaped FO

we are in a very unusual position where all of a sudden we have a bunch of guys we like, and even some guys who we like are riding a lot of pine, and we have almost 3 first rounders next year.

i can just as easily see a major trade as i could a major FA signing

i love Burks and Bullock, but let's also be honest. They didn't all of a sudden get good. Instead the CS has found a way to put those guys in a position to succeed. I'd like to think they have the ability to do that with others too. Taj and Rose are different players too. Not happy about losing any of those guys but just saying to reinforce there is a CS aspect too, to their success and we could dip into that again if needed.

I'd make the case that Burks might've been a little better the season before and I don't see his value increasing THAT much. I think Bullock could pull a mid-level on the open market for two years. I'd be comfortable with that. Bullock has returned to the form he had when he was in Detroit and that got him an initial deal 2/$21M. He's older now, but legit 3 & D guys are still hard to find.

all fair points. i think we need to be super disciplined. there are some expendables and some not so much.

after a horrible night like tonight you get reminded of the value of a guy who can really step it up when the normally reliable guys aren't playing so great. trick will be finding that guy