That's before thinking about the gamble of us trading our picks unprotected. Please no.

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/TommyBeer/status/1561707383071571968

Is any of this reliable? That’s a lot of detail about a trade that hasn’t happened.

blkexec wrote:

Clean wrote:I am OK with the overall value of the trade but I am on the 3 unprotected picks side of things vs the adding Obi Toppin side of things. No way would I feel good with Randle being the only PF on the team. He is way too volatile.

Lets assume this trade is accepted. Then we have a decent 10 man rotation. Which is probably best for Thibs rotation style. This would also mean RJ, Randle, Brunson, D.Mitch will all play ~35 mins per (based on last years min count). I only checked RJ and Randle, so I'm assuming Thibs will play D.Mitch and Brunson similar heavy mins. But I think this works in Thibs favor.

I see Mitch Rob and Hartenstein splitting 48 mins.

Rose, IQ, Grimes and Sims getting the remaining mins off the bench. (on average ~15 mins each).

Now will this equal more wins? Yes

Will this mean we make the playin? Yes

So this will be an improvement for sure. If Randle can adjust his game to play more off the ball and be affective, then we will do better than ESPNs projections.

Thats my take on the impact on this trade. Hate to see Obi go, but love to keep Grimes, RJ and IQ. Not sure how this all works out money wise, but hey I'm just a fan. Leave that up to the GMs and fake GMs to chime in.

If this is true then its getting closer. I can live with that deal. Its a compromise but this is the new reality. At his age, years on Contract, and 7 foot wingspan (Lol) its not easy to look at replicating what others have done on trades. PG13 looked expensive when he was moved. Melo was walking out the door and had an opt out. He could also dictate where he'd resign. With his balky knee at that moment he could justify sitting then walking if he did not get what he wanted.

I'd hope we give up no more than 2 of our unprotected.

I too hate to see Obi go. Where does IQ play if Drose is healthy?

jskinny35 wrote:

blkexec wrote:

Clean wrote:I am OK with the overall value of the trade but I am on the 3 unprotected picks side of things vs the adding Obi Toppin side of things. No way would I feel good with Randle being the only PF on the team. He is way too volatile.

Lets assume this trade is accepted. Then we have a decent 10 man rotation. Which is probably best for Thibs rotation style. This would also mean RJ, Randle, Brunson, D.Mitch will all play ~35 mins per (based on last years min count). I only checked RJ and Randle, so I'm assuming Thibs will play D.Mitch and Brunson similar heavy mins. But I think this works in Thibs favor.

I see Mitch Rob and Hartenstein splitting 48 mins.

Rose, IQ, Grimes and Sims getting the remaining mins off the bench. (on average ~15 mins each).

Now will this equal more wins? Yes

Will this mean we make the playin? Yes

So this will be an improvement for sure. If Randle can adjust his game to play more off the ball and be affective, then we will do better than ESPNs projections.

Thats my take on the impact on this trade. Hate to see Obi go, but love to keep Grimes, RJ and IQ. Not sure how this all works out money wise, but hey I'm just a fan. Leave that up to the GMs and fake GMs to chime in.

I'd hate to trade this much for DM - but if we are committed to this type of deal I think we should swap IQ for Obi in the deal as there won't be many minutes left for IQ if Brunson, Mitchell, D.Rose and RJ remain on the team. Randle is already on thin ice so who plays the 4 if/when Randle has to be moved. Again would prefer to keep both but really think we need Toppin more then IQ given what would be left on the roster.

At this point, Miles Bridges could be a FA next season. His reputation is going to be mud though if/when he loses his court case. Maybe Hart plays a little at the 4? Our team would be pretty small and not super athletic so I’m not sure how that would play out This FO has been very calculated so I am sure they have a plan B and C. Didn’t we also have a guy from summer league who was decent and could probably fill in for 10 minutes a night. I’m thing Thibs really likes the pairing of Rose/IQ in the second unit so that’s not changing.

If I had to go out on a limb, I would say that we are trying to hold onto as many picks as possible to use in another deal.

Nalod wrote:

blkexec wrote:

Clean wrote:I am OK with the overall value of the trade but I am on the 3 unprotected picks side of things vs the adding Obi Toppin side of things. No way would I feel good with Randle being the only PF on the team. He is way too volatile.

Lets assume this trade is accepted. Then we have a decent 10 man rotation. Which is probably best for Thibs rotation style. This would also mean RJ, Randle, Brunson, D.Mitch will all play ~35 mins per (based on last years min count). I only checked RJ and Randle, so I'm assuming Thibs will play D.Mitch and Brunson similar heavy mins. But I think this works in Thibs favor.

I see Mitch Rob and Hartenstein splitting 48 mins.

Rose, IQ, Grimes and Sims getting the remaining mins off the bench. (on average ~15 mins each).

Now will this equal more wins? Yes

Will this mean we make the playin? Yes

So this will be an improvement for sure. If Randle can adjust his game to play more off the ball and be affective, then we will do better than ESPNs projections.

Thats my take on the impact on this trade. Hate to see Obi go, but love to keep Grimes, RJ and IQ. Not sure how this all works out money wise, but hey I'm just a fan. Leave that up to the GMs and fake GMs to chime in.

If this is true then its getting closer. I can live with that deal. Its a compromise but this is the new reality. At his age, years on Contract, and 7 foot wingspan (Lol) its not easy to look at replicating what others have done on trades. PG13 looked expensive when he was moved. Melo was walking out the door and had an opt out. He could also dictate where he'd resign. With his balky knee at that moment he could justify sitting then walking if he did not get what he wanted.

I'd hope we give up no more than 2 of our unprotected.

I too hate to see Obi go. Where does IQ play if Drose is healthy?

Based on the math I explained above. If those 4 all get Randle type mins (~35mins per) then IQ gets ~15

RJ 33 Grimes 15 = 48
Randle 34 Sims 14 = 48
Brunson 35 Rose 13 = 48
D.Mitch 35 IQ 13 = 48
M.Rob 25 Hart 23 = 48

Perfect 10 man rotation for Thibs. So the rotation problem is fixed. Grimes, IQ and others get the usual backup mins. Rose not playing every game. Same with Mitch. But lets say everybody stays healthy, plenty of mins to go around in a 10 man rotation. IQ will get similar minutes from his past seasons with the knicks. Basically as far as mins wise, nothing really changes much. IQ and Grimes are backups, just like last year.

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/TommyBeer/status/1561707383071571968

Is any of this reliable? That’s a lot of detail about a trade that hasn’t happened.

Not really

KnickDanger wrote:

martin wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/TommyBeer/status/1561707383071571968

Is any of this reliable? That’s a lot of detail about a trade that hasn’t happened.

Not really

These schnooks know we lap it up == reliability is not a concern.

Derrick Rose also works if they want to keep Cam and McBride

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/BleacherReport/status/1561733499429724160

They need to just stop negotiating with Ainge. That is a legit package and he wants more. Just stop and move on.

EwingsGlass wrote:5 picks and Toppin is a haul for Mitchell. I can't go further. I don't even like the unprotected nature of those picks. I'd love to have Mitchell, but not more than I like downside risk protection.

Thats way to high as is. I dont even want Mitchell right now--were not considering having two smaller guards that both need the ball.