JCrusher wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:I still don't agree with trading out of the 19th spot in such a strong draft. Now, maybe that extra pick is useful in getting a star here (because we all know chance are good a trade for one is coming)
but if I'm another team, I'd rather take a flyer on the 19th pick from this draft (relatively consensus talent) than one from a regular draft. That said, if it conveys in 23' (or whatever year high schoolers can enter, then all bets are off.) We do probably get that CHA pick in the next 2 drafts imo.

I don't get your logic. Let's assume that Grimes WAS their first player target after the 18th pick happened (it's not 100% certain but we can have a good feel for that).

Why was it bad to trade back and get an extra asset while getting the guy you wanted?

I didn't say trading back was bad. I have no problem with that. And as I said, I loved our draft.

I said trading out of 19 was bad because the talent available there is most likely better than what will be available with the CHA pick. (Barring we luck out and get into the high school draft.)

What?

Grimes was the target at 19 for the Knicks.

Grimes > Grimes + future pick?

THE KNICKS GOT AN EXTRA ASSET and the player they wanted at 19. End of story. The rest of your logic just don't stand up

Grimes wasn't the target at 19, it was Murphy or Mann, judging from reports. If Grimes was the target, do you pass on your target?

My problem is a HEAVILY protected future pick is less valuable than #19 from this draft, strongest draft in last 10 years.
We sold ourselves short and most definitely could have gotten a better pick from another team, but probably they were caught off guard.

Regardless, just bookmark this and let's see how it plays out over the coming years. Looking at other forums, it is clear many fans agree with me.
But it's just a game, no big deal for me.

Who here would trade out of the strongest draft in the last 10 years for a heavily protected future pick, maybe even 2 2nd's?

You don't make a decision at pick #19 on guys who were already off the board. They also wanted Duarte and Bouknight too. So what?

You make decisions on what is in front of you and their decision was based off of what was available after #18.

It's comes down to this.... you want a protected future pick or nothing. And you keep choosing nothing and then whine about players who were already drafted.

Your problem is that you don't understand the situation.

I mean you seem to be the one whining. I think the other poster brought up a fair point

What's his point?

Chandler wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:I still don't agree with trading out of the 19th spot in such a strong draft. Now, maybe that extra pick is useful in getting a star here (because we all know chance are good a trade for one is coming)
but if I'm another team, I'd rather take a flyer on the 19th pick from this draft (relatively consensus talent) than one from a regular draft. That said, if it conveys in 23' (or whatever year high schoolers can enter, then all bets are off.) We do probably get that CHA pick in the next 2 drafts imo.

I don't get your logic. Let's assume that Grimes WAS their first player target after the 18th pick happened (it's not 100% certain but we can have a good feel for that).

Why was it bad to trade back and get an extra asset while getting the guy you wanted?

I didn't say trading back was bad. I have no problem with that. And as I said, I loved our draft.

I said trading out of 19 was bad because the talent available there is most likely better than what will be available with the CHA pick. (Barring we luck out and get into the high school draft.)

What?

Grimes was the target at 19 for the Knicks.

Grimes > Grimes + future pick?

THE KNICKS GOT AN EXTRA ASSET and the player they wanted at 19. End of story. The rest of your logic just don't stand up

Grimes wasn't the target at 19, it was Murphy or Mann, judging from reports. If Grimes was the target, do you pass on your target?

My problem is a HEAVILY protected future pick is less valuable than #19 from this draft, strongest draft in last 10 years.
We sold ourselves short and most definitely could have gotten a better pick from another team, but probably they were caught off guard.

Regardless, just bookmark this and let's see how it plays out over the coming years. Looking at other forums, it is clear many fans agree with me.
But it's just a game, no big deal for me.

Who here would trade out of the strongest draft in the last 10 years for a heavily protected future pick, maybe even 2 2nd's?

I'm not buying the bold. Draft was strong but also strange. there were a lot of teams with multiple picks and couldn't move them, and probably didn't want even more. There are lots of teams that had nothing to offer and certainly weren't going to offer something unprotected for a 19.

The Charlotte deal was somewhat complex so it's not like they concocted that in the 5-10 minutes the Knicks had immediately preceding the pick.

The simplest answer is probably the right one. The board didn't develop exactly as hoped, and the Knicks saw more value in the trade than adding another rookie, not to mention the $$ savings they could use for Kemba eventually

Does anyone realistically think that Jalen is a Thibs guy?

I'm not even convinced he's an NBA guy yet. The Summer League is built for guards and athletic forwards. Little structure and all that is required is for you to get up and go. The questions surrounding his game at Duke revolved around his inability to really thrive in the half-court, his three (which didn't look that bad in SL) and his low IQ on defense. He was benched at Duke for those reasons. None of these concerns were ever really going to get answered in SL. Let's wait until he gets minutes, if he can on a deep Hawks roster, and see how he responds when his game gets dissected by opposing teams.

BRIGGS wrote:At some point we will need a player who has every asset that Jalen has--athletic big wing who can handle shoot rebound taller than 6-7. Im not going to complain about our draft--we got good players. But we had a chance to bring this guy on board for cheap. However the Knicks FO has earned the right at this point to make their own determinations without being questioned for now

Good thing Rose brought home the Bacon.

Chandler wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:

martin wrote:

CanItGetAnyWorse wrote:I still don't agree with trading out of the 19th spot in such a strong draft. Now, maybe that extra pick is useful in getting a star here (because we all know chance are good a trade for one is coming)
but if I'm another team, I'd rather take a flyer on the 19th pick from this draft (relatively consensus talent) than one from a regular draft. That said, if it conveys in 23' (or whatever year high schoolers can enter, then all bets are off.) We do probably get that CHA pick in the next 2 drafts imo.

I don't get your logic. Let's assume that Grimes WAS their first player target after the 18th pick happened (it's not 100% certain but we can have a good feel for that).

Why was it bad to trade back and get an extra asset while getting the guy you wanted?

I didn't say trading back was bad. I have no problem with that. And as I said, I loved our draft.

I said trading out of 19 was bad because the talent available there is most likely better than what will be available with the CHA pick. (Barring we luck out and get into the high school draft.)

What?

Grimes was the target at 19 for the Knicks.

Grimes > Grimes + future pick?

THE KNICKS GOT AN EXTRA ASSET and the player they wanted at 19. End of story. The rest of your logic just don't stand up

Grimes wasn't the target at 19, it was Murphy or Mann, judging from reports. If Grimes was the target, do you pass on your target?

My problem is a HEAVILY protected future pick is less valuable than #19 from this draft, strongest draft in last 10 years.
We sold ourselves short and most definitely could have gotten a better pick from another team, but probably they were caught off guard.

Regardless, just bookmark this and let's see how it plays out over the coming years. Looking at other forums, it is clear many fans agree with me.
But it's just a game, no big deal for me.

Who here would trade out of the strongest draft in the last 10 years for a heavily protected future pick, maybe even 2 2nd's?

I'm not buying the bold. Draft was strong but also strange. there were a lot of teams with multiple picks and couldn't move them, and probably didn't want even more. There are lots of teams that had nothing to offer and certainly weren't going to offer something unprotected for a 19.

The Charlotte deal was somewhat complex so it's not like they concocted that in the 5-10 minutes the Knicks had immediately preceding the pick.

The simplest answer is probably the right one. The board didn't develop exactly as hoped, and the Knicks saw more value in the trade than adding another rookie, not to mention the $$ savings they could use for Kemba eventually

Does anyone realistically think that Jalen is a Thibs guy?

When I heard that the number 16 pick was Traded by the Thunder for 2 heavily protected future firsts (2022 & 2023) from the Rockets, I thought "What a terrible trade, trading out of a strong draft for 2 heavily protected future firsts."

Then I heard of our trade (before hearing it was a heavily protected pick) and thought "Damn, that is chancy. I wouldn't have done that as CHA might be ok."
But then I heard that it was acgually a heavily protected 1st round pick and I thought "What a TERRIBLE trade." I first fell into silence, just like most of the Youtube videos that reported it live.
Now, that is just at face value, not conflating the other picks/players we selected later (all of whom I liked.)

So, 3 picks below ours nets you 2 heavily protected firsts, but not ours? We should have had a trade partner lined up. I don't buy the CHA deal was ready as it was and is terrible.

Jalen isn't a Thibs guy but neither is Tre Mann (and by all accounts we wanted him.) Is Bouknight a Thibs guy? Nope, but we supposedly had some interest in him.
There were a lot of highly talented guys who don't play much defense (Thibs guys) in this draft. You go for the higher asset regarding future value, not a highly protected first which has less value and might actually amount to 2 2nds.

Maybe its not so much that Randle might not have elite defense on the parimeter but then seems most wings won’t be able to guard him. I can’t tell you the next 2 years either.

Uptown wrote:

Nalod wrote:6’7 RJ Barrett perhaps?
6’9 Randle? He really plays a lot o wing like minutes?

Maybe its not so much that Randle might not have elite defense on the parimeter but then seems most wings won’t be able to guard him. I can’t tell you the next 2 years either.

RJ and Randle's presence shouldn't prevent us from from taking the best player on the board. You can never have enough elite wings on the roster. In Johnson, we add a a player allstar potential, that we will control for the next 4-5 years? Talent like that is rarely available outside of the lottery.

There are a lot more things to consider outside of just raw, potential talent?

Bro quit on his team, was ineligible his last year in HS, and when did did play at Duke they weren't even ranked in top 25 and barely suffered after he left?

Meanwhile guy like Grimes leads his team to a final four appearance.

The Knicks all but told us that they HEAVILY consider things like character, readiness, proven track record regarding their selections. That's their MO.

Why do you think they would make a heavy exception for him?

Uptown wrote:

Nalod wrote:6’7 RJ Barrett perhaps?
6’9 Randle? He really plays a lot o wing like minutes?

Maybe its not so much that Randle might not have elite defense on the parimeter but then seems most wings won’t be able to guard him. I can’t tell you the next 2 years either.

RJ and Randle's presence shouldn't prevent us from from taking the best player on the board. You can never have enough elite wings on the roster. In Johnson, we add a a player allstar potential, that we will control for the next 4-5 years? Talent like that is rarely available outside of the lottery.

Jmpasq wrote:

martin wrote:

Uptown wrote:

Nalod wrote:6’7 RJ Barrett perhaps?
6’9 Randle? He really plays a lot o wing like minutes?

Maybe its not so much that Randle might not have elite defense on the parimeter but then seems most wings won’t be able to guard him. I can’t tell you the next 2 years either.

RJ and Randle's presence shouldn't prevent us from from taking the best player on the board. You can never have enough elite wings on the roster. In Johnson, we add a a player allstar potential, that we will control for the next 4-5 years? Talent like that is rarely available outside of the lottery.

There are a lot more things to consider outside of just raw, potential talent?

Bro quit on his team, was ineligible his last year in HS, and when did did play at Duke they weren't even ranked in top 25 and barely suffered after he left?

Meanwhile guy like Grimes leads his team to a final four appearance.

The Knicks all but told us that they HEAVILY consider things like character, readiness, proven track record regarding their selections. That's their MO.

Why do you think they would make a heavy exception for him?

Did Mitch quit on his team?

Johnson opted out during a global pandemic. He did what was best for himself and his health. He didn't owe Duke anything.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

martin wrote:

Uptown wrote:

Nalod wrote:6’7 RJ Barrett perhaps?
6’9 Randle? He really plays a lot o wing like minutes?

Maybe its not so much that Randle might not have elite defense on the parimeter but then seems most wings won’t be able to guard him. I can’t tell you the next 2 years either.

RJ and Randle's presence shouldn't prevent us from from taking the best player on the board. You can never have enough elite wings on the roster. In Johnson, we add a a player allstar potential, that we will control for the next 4-5 years? Talent like that is rarely available outside of the lottery.

There are a lot more things to consider outside of just raw, potential talent?

Bro quit on his team, was ineligible his last year in HS, and when did did play at Duke they weren't even ranked in top 25 and barely suffered after he left?

Meanwhile guy like Grimes leads his team to a final four appearance.

The Knicks all but told us that they HEAVILY consider things like character, readiness, proven track record regarding their selections. That's their MO.

Why do you think they would make a heavy exception for him?

Did Mitch quit on his team?

Johnson opted out during a global pandemic. He did what was best for himself and his health. He didn't owe Duke anything.

Point is, Knicks did their scouting and they decided they liked Grimes more. 18 other teams graded JJ and they passed. Did the Knicks and those other teams mess up? Maybe, it happens. Is summer league to soon to die on this hill? Heck yeah. Why not wait until half of a season to make this a thing. That would still be too early, but at least you'd have a few games of actual game play to go on.

Why did the Knicks FO (Perry) select a SG (Grimes) with the Knicks first pick in the draft?
Wasn't the Knicks biggest weakness (after D.Rose arrive) the SF position? Bullock did a well job, but we got nothing from Knox as a backup SF in the rotation, we had to use Burks, which gave us a 3-Guard lineup in the 2nd unit. Having Knox tier-3 inconsistent performance, plus losing Bullock to the FA market ..
The Knicks first priority in the 2021 draft class were to select the best SF available. really made
The 2021 NBA draft were strong at having 11 decent NBA-ready SF & Point-Forward players.
The Knicks first selection with the 19th pick in the 2021 draft class were to select a Knicks team priority Jalen Johnson, and forget the Dukes incident because of Covid-19 !!!

To give the Knicks the strength they need at the forward position in the 2021-22 NBA season, the Knicks should've been ready to select one out of the 11 potential SF names below if available at the 19th pick.

1) Cunningham
2) Green
3) Barnes
4) Kuminga
5) Jalen Johnson
6) Wagner
7) Bouknight
8) Duarte
9) Kispert
10) Murphy
11) Giddey