nycericanguy wrote:

VDesai wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

VDesai wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....

2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.

This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.

Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.

Yeah players salaries on the roster and off are also escalating. How much of the bench in the future do you want being minimum salaries? The playoffs are turning into a grind with injury attrition. Perhaps what the Thunder and Pacers showed us is having more quality depth 1-10 in your rotation is the right model to follow - of course the Pacers losing their one irreplaceable guy shows that even that model can teeter.

I also personally think the Knicks make more sense with 2 solid rotation guys vs. one Bridges with the way they play today. That said no one has a lens into what the style will be with a new coach and we're working off 5 years of Thibs. Maybe someone has to the key to unlock it in an even better way, but I think 2 shooters that play defense along with Jalen/KAT/OG makes a lot of sense.

Both teams were playing mainly 8 players in the playoffs.

IDK where this idea comes from that everyone else was going 10 deep in the playoffs. That's just not the case.

I'd like for us to play 9-10 deep in reg season, get more guys in rhythm, try more things, and I think the next coach will do that. But come playoff time teams are gonna shorten to 8 guys, thats just what it is.

Mikal is not the problem, 29 teams would love to have him. I could see him putting up 20ppg on 50/38 next season now that he's more comfortable here, and I do think he can be better utilized.

Pacers had 9 guys play 14mpg or more. Their 10th/11th guys rotated as a reserve center and played about 10mpg depending on the matchup (and one of those guys hit 4 3's against us in the decisive game) and had an 12th guy in Walker who played meaningful minutes in a handful of games throughout the playoffs with an ankle injury. They meaningfully used 12 guys.

if thats the criteria then we used 10-11 guys as well.

Wright, Precious, Shamet, Mitch, CAM, Deuce all played meaningful minutes at points during the playoffs.

but outside of spot and situtional minutes teams are gonna play their top 8 guys in the playoffs.

Its not the same- and its merely a matter of counting - The Knicks did not have nearly the number of guys playing the number of games and minutes per game as the Pacers. To say differently is just ignoring what actually happened and the counting numbers that evidence that.

It's fine - I get the crux of your argument, you think 1 Bridges is more valuable than 2 rotation pieces, and that's a fair side of the argument to take . I'm on the other side and I have a lot of pause about giving Bridges the 4 yr extension and committing to him as a piece - I think we'd better off switching gears based on what I observed last year, but a new coach might unlock the things from him he didn't do this year - play more physical defense, fight over screens, not shy away from contact when finishing, get to the line. Bridges didn't seem to love playing for Thibs. We have seen him be better before. He might work better with a different coach and a different distribution of minutes/role.

VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....

I wish fans could also get the % of cap those salaries take up and be more fluid at that level, cause I think I agree and then also disagree with your above.

Mikal may be under performing for this picks trade value per say but not his salary. For me, it's KAT's salary that is out of whack, not Mikal's. Bridges will get extended starting near $35M, his peers in that range fit his output.

If you are the Knicks' FO, I think next year is KAT's determinant year. He is a sort of unicorn but severely limited on D, you need the right mix of players around him. But he is also a sever unicorn offensively, especially in the space, 5-out offense that every team would like to run.

It's KAT's salary and option year that I'm paying attention to and what that extension will look like, cause those talks start next year and the Knicks will want to both maximize him and bring his extension into line with Brunson's.

martin wrote:

VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....

I wish fans could also get the % of cap those salaries take up and be more fluid at that level, cause I think I agree and then also disagree with your above.

Mikal may be under performing for this picks trade value per say but not his salary. For me, it's KAT's salary that is out of whack, not Mikal's. Bridges will get extended starting near $35M, his peers in that range fit his output.

If you are the Knicks' FO, I think next year is KAT's determinant year. He is a sort of unicorn but severely limited on D, you need the right mix of players around him. But he is also a sever unicorn offensively, especially in the space, 5-out offense that every team would like to run.

It's KAT's salary and option year that I'm paying attention to and what that extension will look like, cause those talks start next year and the Knicks will want to both maximize him and bring his extension into line with Brunson's.

I agree, Mikal is a 30-35m player easily, especially considering his durability.

KAT isn't a $53/57m player though. he has two more seasons before the $61m player option.

VDesai wrote:

martin wrote:

VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....

I wish fans could also get the % of cap those salaries take up and be more fluid at that level, cause I think I agree and then also disagree with your above.

Mikal may be under performing for this picks trade value per say but not his salary. For me, it's KAT's salary that is out of whack, not Mikal's. Bridges will get extended starting near $35M, his peers in that range fit his output.

If you are the Knicks' FO, I think next year is KAT's determinant year. He is a sort of unicorn but severely limited on D, you need the right mix of players around him. But he is also a sever unicorn offensively, especially in the space, 5-out offense that every team would like to run.

It's KAT's salary and option year that I'm paying attention to and what that extension will look like, cause those talks start next year and the Knicks will want to both maximize him and bring his extension into line with Brunson's.

What I'm saying is its not a matter of whether mathematically we can afford the 4 guys - we can. We can also afford to pay 2-3 more guys reasonable salaries. But I think the realities we are seeing is filling out the back half with veteran mins and 2nd rounders. The more top heavy you get, the more you're building the back half that way. We got a lot of value out of Cam Payne at a minimum salary till we didn't...those players are gonna be flawed, but will have to play some meaningful roles.

thats what happens in the playoffs, and thats exactly why rotations get shortened and teams mainly play their top 8 guys.

Trading Mikal for guys like MAx Christie, who was already getting his min and role cut in the REGULAR SEASON, is not the answer. Guys like that could just as easily become unplayable in the playoffs too or very limited.

nycericanguy wrote:

VDesai wrote:

martin wrote:

VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....

I wish fans could also get the % of cap those salaries take up and be more fluid at that level, cause I think I agree and then also disagree with your above.

Mikal may be under performing for this picks trade value per say but not his salary. For me, it's KAT's salary that is out of whack, not Mikal's. Bridges will get extended starting near $35M, his peers in that range fit his output.

If you are the Knicks' FO, I think next year is KAT's determinant year. He is a sort of unicorn but severely limited on D, you need the right mix of players around him. But he is also a sever unicorn offensively, especially in the space, 5-out offense that every team would like to run.

It's KAT's salary and option year that I'm paying attention to and what that extension will look like, cause those talks start next year and the Knicks will want to both maximize him and bring his extension into line with Brunson's.

What I'm saying is its not a matter of whether mathematically we can afford the 4 guys - we can. We can also afford to pay 2-3 more guys reasonable salaries. But I think the realities we are seeing is filling out the back half with veteran mins and 2nd rounders. The more top heavy you get, the more you're building the back half that way. We got a lot of value out of Cam Payne at a minimum salary till we didn't...those players are gonna be flawed, but will have to play some meaningful roles.

thats what happens in the playoffs, and thats exactly why rotations get shortened and teams mainly play their top 8 guys.

Trading Mikal for guys like MAx Christie, who was already getting his min and role cut in the REGULAR SEASON, is not the answer. Guys like that could just as easily become unplayable in the playoffs too or very limited.

I'm a little concerned about your ability to read box scores - or maybe you're being intentionally dishonest to make an argument, but its right there for anyone to read. He consistently kept playing 30 mpg in Dallas and got more shot volume - his role increased not decreased.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/45559441/2025-nba-mock-draft-latest-first-second-round-predictions-all-59-picks
https://www.espn.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/4432582/max-christie

martin wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:I'm trading OG before I trade Mikal.

OG is making $40m+, has a history of injury issues, doesn't have the same offensive bag that Mikal does, and isn't really a good rebounder at the 4.

If we could get someone like JJJ for OG I'd do in a heartbeat. Heck even a guy like Siakam would be a better option, he ate OG in the playoffs.

JJJ is more injury prone that OG, if that's your argument. OG is not a natural 4 so for me the rest is a bit apples/oranges comparison.

he had ONE season where he missed alot of games. Last 4 seasons he's played 78,63,66,74 games. I'm not worried about his durability.

OG has had a few seasons missing 30+ games.

but yes OG not being a natural 4 isn't ideal either.

nycericanguy wrote:with KAT for KD off the table, we are probably best off running it back, adding a vet piece.

I agree. Knicks are actually looking very well positioned next year and Vegas reflects that. We are a top 3 contender and #1 eastern conference projected. Running it back is the best play for us.

I would still explore small trades - we still need some balancing out of the roster and bench. But some of that can come from within if Kolek and/or Dadiet are ready next year.

If the FO believes it as well, it will be interesting to see if any of the starters get moved in the offseason. These injuries to star players on other teams might have changed their plans.

Rookie wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:With Boston and Indy without their star player next season, and Brunson still in his prime. Next season might be our best opportunity to make it to the Finals for a while.

If the FO believes it as well, it will be interesting to see if any of the starters get moved in the offseason. These injuries to star players on other teams might have changed their plans.

Cleveland is still lurking in the shadows.

True, there is still competition like Cleveland and Detroit. But Boston and Indiana played in the last two Finals, and being without their best player is a big deal. It probably helps narrow the field.