EwingsGlass wrote:

joec32033 wrote:How Good is OG? He is basically what everyone wants Grimes to become. He is a developed (25 year old) Grimes (22).

With 6 more inches of wingspan and the ability to slot Barrett back to SG where he has a comparative advantage.

Depending where you look Grimes is 6-4 or 6-5 at 210 with a 6-7.75 wingspan at 22.

Depending on where you look OG is 6-8 at 232 with a 7-2 wingspan.

Would you prefer I said a bigger version of what you want Grimes to be? My statement still hold true regardless of size.

Putting Barrett back at SG exposes his lack of speed and handle and lack of a post game.. I liked Barrett as a 2 also, but it will hinder him

joec32033 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

joec32033 wrote:How Good is OG? He is basically what everyone wants Grimes to become. He is a developed (25 year old) Grimes (22).

With 6 more inches of wingspan and the ability to slot Barrett back to SG where he has a comparative advantage.

Depending where you look Grimes is 6-4 or 6-5 at 210 with a 6-7.75 wingspan at 22.

Depending on where you look OG is 6-8 at 232 with a 7-2 wingspan.

Would you prefer I said a bigger version of what you want Grimes to be? My statement still hold true regardless of size.

Putting Barrett back at SG exposes his lack of speed and handle and lack of a post game.. I liked Barrett as a 2 also, but it will hinder him

It boggles me that more people wouldn't envision RJ off the bench. IMHO it's perfect for him. He is already the guy running with the bench unit, he should be the main focus and he is still struggling with it or at least not super exceeding with that crew although injury and etc etc.

I don't get why the Knicks wouldn't love that scenario - RJ is the type of ego that could probably handle it IMO

I've seen lots complain about the usage of Randle, RJ, Brunson and I kinda agree with it. Move RJ to come off bench and that alleviates some of that.

And when you have Mitch, Randle, OG, Grimes, Brunson and let Randle/Brunson cook for the first quarter, you get lots of defense to slow down other team with MORE spacing cause OG is a much better distance shooter than RJ and it opens up the middle more for Randle/Brunson.

Barrett is very MEH to me — gets his points but impacts the game little in other areas and his D is mediocre at best.

Not a big OG fan but I do think he’s a better fit with Brunson/Randle and would up our D considerably.

If we were able to run out OG, Grimes, Mitch - that’s 3 legit defenders in starting.ending unit.

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

joec32033 wrote:How Good is OG? He is basically what everyone wants Grimes to become. He is a developed (25 year old) Grimes (22).

With 6 more inches of wingspan and the ability to slot Barrett back to SG where he has a comparative advantage.

Depending where you look Grimes is 6-4 or 6-5 at 210 with a 6-7.75 wingspan at 22.

Depending on where you look OG is 6-8 at 232 with a 7-2 wingspan.

Would you prefer I said a bigger version of what you want Grimes to be? My statement still hold true regardless of size.

Putting Barrett back at SG exposes his lack of speed and handle and lack of a post game.. I liked Barrett as a 2 also, but it will hinder him

It boggles me that more people wouldn't envision RJ off the bench. IMHO it's perfect for him. He is already the guy running with the bench unit, he should be the main focus and he is still struggling with is or at least not super exceeding with that crew although injury and etc etc.

I don't get why the Knicks wouldn't love that scenario - RJ is the type of ego that could probably handle it IMO

I've seen lots complain about the usage of Randle, RJ, Brunson and I kinda agree with it. Move RJ to come off bench and that alleviates some of that.

And when you have Mitch, Randle, OG, Grimes, Brunson and let Randle/Brunson cook for the first quarter, you get lots of defense to slow down other team with MORE spacing cause OG is a much better distance shooter than RJ and it's open up the middle more for Randle/Brunson.

My issue with OG is that you lose a bit from a ball handling, creation standpoint with him in the starting lineup. He's a role player. I'd probably do the trade if it's reasonable, but realistically he's the piece you add if you're close. Also, his future salary could be a problem. Is $30M per really that unrealistic? I think you're looking at least $25M.

Ball handling and creation is a strong point for RJ? For me it's his weakness, he sucks at both. IMHO team is not looking for either from OG.

I really don't know OG the player well but he is an elite defender who can also hit the 3pt shot. High level role player.

I feel like Wiggins in GS is better than OG in a lot of respects. He extended starting at $25M recently but maybe that is also to stay within that organization, so hometown discount perhaps. I thought that was a pretty good deal considering the upcoming salary cap numbers in a few years. Don't know if that represents the market or what OG would want.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/BenRitholtzNBA/status/1618668558451617792

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

joec32033 wrote:How Good is OG? He is basically what everyone wants Grimes to become. He is a developed (25 year old) Grimes (22).

With 6 more inches of wingspan and the ability to slot Barrett back to SG where he has a comparative advantage.

Depending where you look Grimes is 6-4 or 6-5 at 210 with a 6-7.75 wingspan at 22.

Depending on where you look OG is 6-8 at 232 with a 7-2 wingspan.

Would you prefer I said a bigger version of what you want Grimes to be? My statement still hold true regardless of size.

Putting Barrett back at SG exposes his lack of speed and handle and lack of a post game.. I liked Barrett as a 2 also, but it will hinder him

It boggles me that more people wouldn't envision RJ off the bench. IMHO it's perfect for him. He is already the guy running with the bench unit, he should be the main focus and he is still struggling with it or at least not super exceeding with that crew although injury and etc etc.

I don't get why the Knicks wouldn't love that scenario - RJ is the type of ego that could probably handle it IMO

I've seen lots complain about the usage of Randle, RJ, Brunson and I kinda agree with it. Move RJ to come off bench and that alleviates some of that.

And when you have Mitch, Randle, OG, Grimes, Brunson and let Randle/Brunson cook for the first quarter, you get lots of defense to slow down other team with MORE spacing cause OG is a much better distance shooter than RJ and it opens up the middle more for Randle/Brunson.

You know I like Barrett alot. I really think putting him on the bench is an issue. I would prefer to play him at the 2 and do what Thibs does by overlapping him into the second unit if they get OG. I really think you need to ride out his early years. The guy is still only 22. He doesn't even start to enter his prime for another 3 years. I think OG is a nice piece but I think he is what people are hoping Grimes develops into. And Grimes is another one that is only 22.

I think you upgrade the bench (I think it is more cost effective, you can probably get 2 maybe 3 pieces instead of one) let your youth learn and keep your assets.

joec32033 wrote:

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

joec32033 wrote:How Good is OG? He is basically what everyone wants Grimes to become. He is a developed (25 year old) Grimes (22).

With 6 more inches of wingspan and the ability to slot Barrett back to SG where he has a comparative advantage.

Depending where you look Grimes is 6-4 or 6-5 at 210 with a 6-7.75 wingspan at 22.

Depending on where you look OG is 6-8 at 232 with a 7-2 wingspan.

Would you prefer I said a bigger version of what you want Grimes to be? My statement still hold true regardless of size.

Putting Barrett back at SG exposes his lack of speed and handle and lack of a post game.. I liked Barrett as a 2 also, but it will hinder him

It boggles me that more people wouldn't envision RJ off the bench. IMHO it's perfect for him. He is already the guy running with the bench unit, he should be the main focus and he is still struggling with it or at least not super exceeding with that crew although injury and etc etc.

I don't get why the Knicks wouldn't love that scenario - RJ is the type of ego that could probably handle it IMO

I've seen lots complain about the usage of Randle, RJ, Brunson and I kinda agree with it. Move RJ to come off bench and that alleviates some of that.

And when you have Mitch, Randle, OG, Grimes, Brunson and let Randle/Brunson cook for the first quarter, you get lots of defense to slow down other team with MORE spacing cause OG is a much better distance shooter than RJ and it opens up the middle more for Randle/Brunson.

You know I like Barrett alot. I really think putting him on the bench is an issue. I would prefer to play him at the 2 and do what Thibs does by overlapping him into the second unit if they get OG. I really think you need to ride out his early years. The guy is still only 22. He doesn't even start to enter his prime for another 3 years. I think OG is a nice piece but I think he is what people are hoping Grimes develops into. And Grimes is another one that is only 22.

I think you upgrade the bench (I think it is more cost effective, you can probably get 2 maybe 3 pieces instead of one) let your youth learn and keep your assets.

What's the issue?

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

martin wrote:

joec32033 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

joec32033 wrote:How Good is OG? He is basically what everyone wants Grimes to become. He is a developed (25 year old) Grimes (22).

With 6 more inches of wingspan and the ability to slot Barrett back to SG where he has a comparative advantage.

Depending where you look Grimes is 6-4 or 6-5 at 210 with a 6-7.75 wingspan at 22.

Depending on where you look OG is 6-8 at 232 with a 7-2 wingspan.

Would you prefer I said a bigger version of what you want Grimes to be? My statement still hold true regardless of size.

Putting Barrett back at SG exposes his lack of speed and handle and lack of a post game.. I liked Barrett as a 2 also, but it will hinder him

It boggles me that more people wouldn't envision RJ off the bench. IMHO it's perfect for him. He is already the guy running with the bench unit, he should be the main focus and he is still struggling with it or at least not super exceeding with that crew although injury and etc etc.

I don't get why the Knicks wouldn't love that scenario - RJ is the type of ego that could probably handle it IMO

I've seen lots complain about the usage of Randle, RJ, Brunson and I kinda agree with it. Move RJ to come off bench and that alleviates some of that.

And when you have Mitch, Randle, OG, Grimes, Brunson and let Randle/Brunson cook for the first quarter, you get lots of defense to slow down other team with MORE spacing cause OG is a much better distance shooter than RJ and it opens up the middle more for Randle/Brunson.

You know I like Barrett alot. I really think putting him on the bench is an issue. I would prefer to play him at the 2 and do what Thibs does by overlapping him into the second unit if they get OG. I really think you need to ride out his early years. The guy is still only 22. He doesn't even start to enter his prime for another 3 years. I think OG is a nice piece but I think he is what people are hoping Grimes develops into. And Grimes is another one that is only 22.

I think you upgrade the bench (I think it is more cost effective, you can probably get 2 maybe 3 pieces instead of one) let your youth learn and keep your assets.

What's the issue?

I think part of it is a mental thing. I also think putting him on the bench hurts his value and will impede his development. I don't think OG is that much better as an overall player, he is older, and he gets hurt alot.